Kootenay six point restrictions - why?

[brotherjack]

Why is it, that there is deemed a healthy enough elk population in the East Kootenay's to support incredibly high numbers of LEH's for cow/calf over the last 3 years (nearly 2,000 in 3 years, if my math is correct), and now to support an ongoing OPEN junior/senior hunt for cow/calf elk, which if my subjective impressions in the bush are any indication - was hunted very very very hard by the young and old alike. Keeping in mind, that the harvesting of a cow/female calf has significant negative impact on future population numbers far beyond the loss of the individual animal in question. But despite popluation numbers deemed high enough to support all that - those same population numbers are not deemed high enough to lower the six point bull restriction?

Yes, the question does come from a bit of frustration - but it's an honest question, I think.

[Fisher-Dude]

The introduction of the 6 point season was designed to boost the population levels after two catastrophic events. One was the harsh winters of the mid-90s. The other was several years of Dimarchi-ism that saw thousands of cow/calf permits issued for political reasons rather than scientific game management reasons (IMO of course!). Research had shown that recruitment of younger bulls to breeding age would help restore populations.

Now we have healthy elk populations again. After my recent trip to the EK, I'm beginning to wonder if the 6 point restriction has run its course. Moreso than before, I noticed a large number of 5 point bulls with harems of cows. I believe the science has shown that 6 point seasons help recovery of herd numbers, but that it isn't a permanent solution for a healthy herd (ie younger bulls eventually end up doing the breeding as mature bulls face harvest pressure). Maybe it's time for the game managers to reconsider the 6 point season?

Brotherjack, have you had a chance to call the Cranbrook bio's office and ask about what their future plans are?

[Elkaholic]

The 6 point is a total miss-management of our elk, its genetic culling. If there wasnt a huge kill off of cows in the 90s the 3pt and better season would still flourish. And the big bulls would be left alone to do the breeding as most people would shoot the first legal bull they had come in to them. Sure you would still have some trophy hunters but on the most part everyone would take what they could get.

This years cow season is going to decimate the population next year, as most people that I seen hunting cows hunted them where ever they wanted, with no knowledge of the restrictions or little care for it. Guys hunting cows on top of the mountains and such.

Also if they were truthfully concerned about hunter numbers they would remove these "restrictive trophy" seasons on elk. Why would a hunter keep hunting for a 6pt year after year after year if they never see one? This and to a smaller part the 4 pt mule deer season have contributed to the decline in hunters for sure. Just my 2 cents.

[brotherjack]

No, I haven't got ambitious enough to call and harass anyone yet - I'm still at the stage where I'm just grousing around on HuntingBC based on my own subjective uninformed opinion. :)

[brotherjack]

Elkaholic - yep, I'm one of those who'd be happy to take a 3 pt every year. I'd rather a smaller elk, actually - less work to pack it out, and The Wife(tm) and I can't even come close to eating a mature bull in a year anyway (at least not with a whitetail or two also in the freezer, which is pretty much a given), so the only reason I'd ever have to shoot a 6 point (other than the current legal requirements) would be if I was hunting antlers (which I don't), or if it was the first legal animal I saw that year.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

So what if they made it a 5pt season?? Bulls should be plenty old enough and that way it would not put pressure specifically on the 6 point genetics.

What do you think????


SSS

[Fisher-Dude]

So what if they made it a 5pt season?? Bulls should be plenty old enough and that way it would not put pressure specifically on the 6 point genetics.

What do you think????


SSS

Then I would be burping elk roast today instead of greasy, slimely, hormone-laced ham. :cool:

Some states use a 5 point rule for the same reasons we use the 6 point rule. Is there a conservation concern in BC that prevents us from going to 5 point or 3 point GOS? The 175,000 hunters we had when there were 23,000 elk in the Rocky Mountain Trench with 3 point seasons in the 80s, to today with 86,000 hunters and 23,000 elk in the Trench tells me there is no conservation concern. DiMarchi-ism had reduced numbers to 16,000 by the mid-late 90s.

Here's another point to consider: when moose were open with GOS in the 80s in region 4, the aggregate bag limit for moose and elk was ONE (ie you could shoot a moose or an elk, but not one of each). A little birdie hinted to me that there may be a GOS moose season again in region 4, so how about 3 point elk and GOS moose to spread the pressure (what pressure with half the hunters?) over the two species?

[J_T]

BJ,

It is a good question you ask, and your observations are not inaccurate. This has been identified.

If I understand his comments correctly I would add a slight adjustment to Fischers comments regarding the "Demarchi" era. Demarchi, under pressure from the ranching community wanted to reduce herd numbers, (you're right, hit the cows) and in doing so, brought about the LEH cow permit in the EK. He then retired and through Government's lack of capacity to respond quickly, this hunt went on longer than it should have.

The six point season was created to appease and provide the local hunters, who wanted a trophy elk hunt and the GO's with trophy hunting, without moving the 6 point to LEH.

The three point bull elk season is on the table at the Kootenay Wildlife Hunting Advisory Committee, for decision at the December meeting. I sit on that committee, if you would like more information on this or other topics that are up for decision. Send me a pm. I'd be interested in your input.

(Fisher is correct. A fork-horn moose season across all of Reg 4 is also on the table for decision)

[Fisher-Dude]

JT, here's a bit of input for the KWHAC meeting from my observations over 30 years of hunting EK elk (and moose when they were open):

1.) Smaller bulls are now holding significant harems of cows (my brother came upon a 4 point with a dozen ladies the other night).

2.) Over 90% of BC's hunters are meat hunters - management objectives for trophy animals, especially in an area as vast as the Trench, would seem to conflict with the desires of the majority of hunters (yet it appeases the G/Os. Need we mention who was formerly the bio for the area :shock: ?).

3.) The moose population is higher now than I have ever seen it in the area. Is the proposed spike/fork season designed to provide opportunity, or is it an appeasement of the G/O who are advertising "trophy" Shiras moose hunts to those who can afford to hunt a mature bull? Will the current moose LEH for any bull remain in place? If so, are there plans to increase LEH numbers for residents to coincide with the higher populations? Region 8 has had spike/fork for years, and the annual harvest region-wide is only about 120 animals, so don't expect moose meat on your table with such a season.

4.) What about a return to the aggregate elk/moose bag limit of one, with more liberal antler configurations? (eg 3 point elk with, for example, 5 point or less moose)? Those of us who have hunted for many years for spike/fork moose know our chances of shooting one are close to NIL (Caveman is the exception).

5.) Do the biologists have good inventory numbers upon which to base their decisions, or are they waving the harvest stats in our faces as proof of populations? Some overly conservative bios tend to implement restrictive seasons and then a few years later say harvest is down - DUH.

6.) When Victoria's objective is the recruitment of 20,000 new hunters, and retention of the 86,000 we still have, the decision to provide as much opportunity as possible for resident hunters when there is no conservation concern should be easy. Less restriction equals more opportunity equals more retention/recruitment.

[J_T]

FD, not sure where to start in response. There is much to say and I risk being mis understood. I will say that all participants at the table have respect for each other. Hunters, GO's, trappers, biologists, Government, using different methods coming from different backgrounds sitting at a table, enjoying each others company, working together. Sometimes seems so different than my attempts at logic and respect on here.

1) Elk: Yes, my own observations too. I have listened to hunters on this site, talked to many that I know and have jotted down some notes about their observations as well and will present this for discussion.

2) As you have said before, most hunters require meat at the end of the hunt to justify the hunt. Clearly Moose is a bigger draw than an elk, deer or goat hunt. To support hunter recruitment, I suspect the new moose season will do just that.

3) The LEH for any bull will continue. I would suggest this (spike-fork horn) direction is clearly not aimed at GO's, in fact the spike-fork horn opportunity clearly places more potential moose hunters in the GO territory. Something that at the table, they accept. Cudos the the fellows representing the GO's at the KWAC table.

4) Aggregate
I remember those days. At present, there is no discussion about putting the aggragate harvest on the table.

5) Re Moose: As you know, wildlife is intricately intertwined. It is said, the wolf population is directly proportional to the moose population. (over other animals) In addition to an observed increase in moose, there is an increase in wolf numbers in Reg 4. The plan/strategy will be to have this season for a 5 year period at minimum.

6) Agree, LEH is an issue and the current Gov structure in Reg 4 "gets it". There are four additional topics for decision in December:
- moose fork-horn across the region
- 3 pt elk in the EK (perhaps area limited. IE zone x)
- West Kootenay move off of LEH in many areas to a combination of GOS, Youth/Senior, bow, LEH, area specifics (a WK zone x)
- turkey firearm season in the EK (also move to a fee for a tag on turkey)

The objectives are harmonization with other regions, recruitment, retention, appropriate wildlife management.

[mark]

I too, think a 5 point season would be a step in the right direction. It would weed out the 5 point gene problem some areas are developing, and probably double the chances of harvesting elk! Us too would of all tagged out by day 3 of our elk hunt with a 5 point season!

[emkul]

I think it should stay the way it is.If they opened a 3 or 5 point season it would be a slaughter and in 2 or 3 seasons from now no one would be saying we could of tagged out if if it wasn't for the 6point season because all the bulls were seeing now would be dead.If anything give out some leh's and some how regulate it to mature 5 points only.

[Walksalot]

The six point or better is an excellent management tool to encourage mature bulls. Having to count six points is not easy at times and that is why it is an effective tool.

[brotherjack]

Walksallot - I get all that. Six point restrictions drastically limit harvest numbers, and if that is the goal, then so be it. But the point I'm on my soapbox about is - if there are so many elk that we are handing out cow/calf LEH's like candy and also running an open jr/sr season for cow/calf (the net result of which in the medium to long run, is going to be the removal of huge numbers of animals from the herd) then there must certainly be enough elk to stop enforcing trophy-animal-only restrictions on all us meat-hunters (IMHO).

[Walksalot]

Could it be that you are focusing on elk alone? Could it be the elk population is being reduced to reduce the elk pressure on habitat to enhance another species such as sheep? Granted they do not conflict much on the summer range but on the winter range it could be an issue.

[Fisher-Dude]

I think it should stay the way it is.If they opened a 3 or 5 point season it would be a slaughter and in 2 or 3 seasons from now no one would be saying we could of tagged out if if it wasn't for the 6point season because all the bulls were seeing now would be dead.If anything give out some leh's and some how regulate it to mature 5 points only.

It wasn't a slaughter when we had twice the number of hunters and a 3 point season. The Trench herd was maintained at 23,000 animals during that time. Why would it be a slaughter now?

[browningboy]

It wasn't a slaughter when we had twice the number of hunters and a 3 point season. The Trench herd was maintained at 23,000 animals during that time. Why would it be a slaughter now?


Because I'd start road hunting in the Koots!! :razz::shock::razz:

[dougan]

another thing is genes allot of five point bulls will probobly never be six points same as 3 point mulies that will never be fours they may run in to trouble in the futer . i think leh 4 point or better would be better

[Fisher-Dude]

Because I'd start road hunting in the Koots!! :razz::shock::razz:

You wouldn't be able to afford it until ya dump that gas-guzzler 'yota and buy a GM diesel! :razz:

[J_T]

For clarity, the proposal on the table in Reg 4 is for a 3 pt season.

In the EK the three point most often represents a yearling (in years past it represented a 2 yr old) The 5 point now most often represents a 2 or 3 yr old and the 6 pts are normally 3 and above, but not many that are above 4 years old and few above 6 years old (prime).

Targeting yearling males does not affect your population year to year.

The proposal is likely (still to be worked out) to start the season and go through the rut with a 6 pt GOS in Ek (satus quo), shifting to a 3 pt season for a short duration at some point near the end of the GOS.

[emkul]

It wasn't a slaughter when we had twice the number of hunters and a 3 point season. The Trench herd was maintained at 23,000 animals during that time. Why would it be a slaughter now?
Thats because all those little bulls were getting shot every year now the bull too cow ratio is higher do to not as many bulls being harvested.I've been hunting the ek for 15yrs and we never use to see the number of bulls you do now.How could it not be a slaughter it doesn't matter were you go now theres bulls eveywhere I drove up 1 busy mainline last year and seen 8 bulls one morning so how would all those bulls survive there would of been 8 dead dumb 3 to 5 points

[horshur]

Thats because all those little bulls were getting shot every year now the bull too cow ratio is higher do to not as many bulls being harvested.I've been hunting the ek for 15yrs and we never use to see the number of bulls you do now.How could it not be a slaughter it doesn't matter were you go now theres bulls eveywhere I drove up 1 busy mainline last year and seen 8 bulls one morning so how would all those bulls survive there would of been 8 dead dumb 3 to 5 points

If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear did it make any noise???

[Fisher-Dude]

Thats because all those little bulls were getting shot every year now the bull too cow ratio is higher do to not as many bulls being harvested.I've been hunting the ek for 15yrs and we never use to see the number of bulls you do now.How could it not be a slaughter it doesn't matter were you go now theres bulls eveywhere I drove up 1 busy mainline last year and seen 8 bulls one morning so how would all those bulls survive there would of been 8 dead dumb 3 to 5 points

Do you have any statistics to back up your statement that ALL those little bulls were being shot? The herd flourished at 23,000 animals with a 3 point season and twice as many hunters. Obviously, the bull:cow ratio was sufficient with the 3 point season and twice as many hunters to ensure a stable population. That is undisputable. Now we have half the hunters - why not go back to a season that allows hunters a better chance of harvest while still maintaining the population at a steady level?

Mild winters in the past 10 years, and a huge reduction in the calf permits have had more to do with the number of bulls you are seeing than bull harvest reductions. Bulls are especially susceptible to harsh winters after the rut. Moreover, elk are not stupid animals. They adapt and survive. Just because you see 8 bulls one day does not equate to 8 dead elk. I've spent 30 years hunting the EK for elk and know all too well how difficult they can be to hunt. I was there in 3 point season with 23,000 animals and we ate tag soup often. Much of the elk population also lives in rugged, inaccessible terrain and therefore doesn't get much or any harvest.

Many have said for the past few years that the extended any buck season in region 5 will wipe out the mule deer. However, the population is still exploding and the seasons are again any buck for over 2 months and LEH doe tags are numerous. The science now dictates that extended/less restrictive seasons aren't affecting population stability as we don't have enough people hunting to make a dent in the populations.

The fact is that we don't have enough hunters to reach target harvests on most game species in BC now. Also, the cost of hunting (eg fuel) has caused many to curtail their activities and hunt fewer days, closer to home. There is no conservation concern on EK elk, so it makes sense to relax the harvest restrictions.

[horshur]

Do you have any statistics to back up your statement that ALL those little bulls were being shot? The herd flourished at 23,000 animals with a 3 point season and twice as many hunters. Obviously, the bull:cow ratio was sufficient with the 3 point season and twice as many hunters to ensure a stable population. That is undisputable. Now we have half the hunters - why not go back to a season that allows hunters a better chance of harvest while still maintaining the population at a steady level?

Mild winters in the past 10 years, and a huge reduction in the calf permits have had more to do with the number of bulls you are seeing than bull harvest reductions. Bulls are especially susceptible to harsh winters after the rut. Moreover, elk are not stupid animals. They adapt and survive. Just because you see 8 bulls one day does not equate to 8 dead elk. I've spent 30 years hunting the EK for elk and know all too well how difficult they can be to hunt. I was there in 3 point season with 23,000 animals and we ate tag soup often. Much of the elk population also lives in rugged, inaccessible terrain and therefore doesn't get much or any harvest.

Many have said for the past few years that the extended any buck season in region 5 will wipe out the mule deer. However, the population is still exploding and the seasons are again any buck for over 2 months and LEH doe tags are numerous. The science now dictates that extended/less restrictive seasons aren't affecting population stability as we don't have enough people hunting to make a dent in the populations.

The fact is that we don't have enough hunters to reach target harvests on most game species in BC now. Also, the cost of hunting (eg fuel) has caused many to curtail their activities and hunt fewer days, closer to home. There is no conservation concern on EK elk, so it makes sense to relax the harvest restrictions.

Id say ditto on moose for much of the province----right now region 3 is 4 point or better for deer--I haven't but run into 1 deer hunter--Steve spent the weekend in the truck 400 kms no hunters--Deer and spike fork moose open right now.
What is the point of high numbers of animals that no one can hunt???

[Fisher-Dude]

Id say ditto on moose for much of the province----right now region 3 is 4 point or better for deer--I haven't but run into 1 deer hunter--Steve spent the weekend in the truck 400 kms no hunters--Deer and spike fork moose open right now.
What is the point of high numbers of animals that no one can hunt???

Steve's a ROAD HUNTER!!!!????? OMG!!!!!!! :shock::shock::shock:

We need more hunters. And you nailed it Andy: What IS the point of high numbers of animals that no one can hunt?

[6616]

[quote=brotherjack;187823]Why is it, that there is deemed a healthy enough elk population in the East Kootenay's to support incredibly high numbers of LEH's for cow/calf over the last 3 years (nearly 2,000 in 3 years, if my math is correct), and now to support an ongoing OPEN junior/senior hunt for cow/calf elk, which if my subjective impressions in the bush are any indication - was hunted very very very hard by the young and old alike. Keeping in mind, that the harvesting of a cow/female calf has significant negative impact on future population numbers far beyond the loss of the individual animal in question. But despite popluation numbers deemed high enough to support all that - those same population numbers are not deemed high enough to lower the six point bull restriction?

This is a very valid question Brotherjack.

First of all, the current numbers of cow/calf LEH are not really what I would call incredibly high, in 1985, '86, and '87 there were approximatelly 10,000 cow/calf authorizations offered "each year" with over 12,000 cow/calf elk killed in those three years alone,,,that was truely incredible. For this fall there are 368 permits in the new x-zones. The success rate for the last two years was about 50%. With the new jr/sr GOS that will go up, but if we shoot about 200 to 300 cows and calves this fall, is that really significant out of a population of more than 25,000 elk?

The current purpose for these cow/calf hunts, the LEH seasons as well as the jr/sr seasons, is to reduce the homesteader (non-migratory) component of the elk population which has became a serious liability to the ranchers over recent years. That's why these hunts are limited to 1100 meters and end before the migratory herds come down into the Trench in mid-October, that way it is hoped the migratory herds will not be impacted significantly Note: homesteader elk also compromise the normal migratory population health by foraging on winter ranges all summer thus potentially limiting winter forage for the migratory herd. Our overall carrying capacity for elk would be greater if we didn't have this non-migratory component. Keep in mind also that nearly all of the EK elk winter range is also tenured for cattle grazing and the available forage is allocated 50/50 between wildlife and domestic cattle.

When the 6 pt season on bulls started we were harvesting 300 to 400 bulls per year (1998, '99 and 2000). That harvest level has increased annually and now stands at around 900 bulls annually. Prior to the 6pt season the peak harvest in a single year under the 3 pt GOS was 1700 but most years it was around 1200 to 1400. The East Kootenay elk population estimate in 1985 was officialy about 28,000, but in reality there were somewhere in the area of 35,000. This was never widely publicised or made official because the ranching community was already up in arms and calling for elk culls.

Today we are again well over 25,000 elk, but in the meantime, we've lost nearly 30,000 Ha of winter range habitat due to forest ingrowth. In 1985 there were very few wolves and predation was not an issue. Also in 1985 the forest companies were engaged in wide-spread clearcutting in all the Trench tributaries which greatly increased the spring/summer/fall carrying capacity for elk. This is not happening today and predator numbers are much higher. Due to habitat loss the actual winter density of elk on the remaining winter range is higher today than it was in 1985 even though there are less elk. Depredation on agricultural land is a huge issue, and the population component of non-migratory elk (currently estimated at 3000 to 5000) are largely responsible.

The 5 year elk management plan we are currently operating under calls for review of the 6pt season next year, and as J_T says, that process is currently underway by the KHWAC Committee (I also sit on that committee). The current proposal is to consider a short 3 pt GOS, but there is lots of time and room for discussion and it could be a 4 pt or 5 pt season if that's what people want and it's deemed sustainable. It will be a very short season the first year to feel out the potential, we need to remember that we have many more miles of backcountry roads now then we did in 1985 and very few safe elk havens remain where hunters aren't penetrating. The Branch will be very conservative to ensure against an over-harvest.

Additionally a large project to research the migratory patterns and the actual numbers of non-migratory elk in the East Kootenay is underway and full region wide population inventories of elk are scheduled for next year. When this data is available it will be easy to make better decisions but with the limited data that's available today the Branch is still in a mode of ultra conservatism, or "err on the side of caution".

Hope this explains the situation.

[tmarschall]

6616..... best explanation I have seen on this topic ever... good post!!!

[Fisher-Dude]

6616, thanks for some more insight on this. You do appear to be in the conservative camp though with your analysis. What you haven't addressed is the effect of having one half of the hunters that we had in the mid 80s, when elk populations were peaking "despite" 3 point seasons in the rut and double the hunting pressure that we have now. If as you say we had a population of 28,000 - 35,000, with 3 point seasons and double the hunters, it proves sustainability of the hunt, and should provide the framework for the KHWAC discussions.

So now, with one half the hunters, and population levels similar to what we had in the mid 80s, there is NO reason not to have a 3 point season in the rut.

We had the "early 6/late 3 point" season as a transition between the 3 point and 6 point seasons in (IIRC) the mid 90s. That late 3 point season may be fine for the local region 4 residents who can hunt out their back doors, but it sucks for the rest of the residents of the province who must schedule holidays and have limited time to hunt the region. Anyone who has hunted elk after the rut knows that success is limited. I remember trudging through snow up to my ass in October with all the bulls holed up post-rut in the thickets on the north faces of the mountains. Only the spikes were left with the cows. We never harvested an elk in that late 3 point season, and other people we spoke with really didn't embrace the "opportunity".

Where do you get your forest harvesting information from, wherein you deduce that forest companies are not doing widespread harvesting in tributaries? Have you been out there lately? The MPB epidemic has seen the 60 ha cutblock maximum scrapped in favour of massive clearcuts in all of the watersheds that I've been in the past 5 years. Also, the large fires from the past 5 years of drought have created a lot more habitat for elk.

Again, it appears the Branch is focussing on comparing harvest numbers of old with harvest numbers of today as a measure of the herd. That is seriously flawed logic because harvest numbers under one set of restrictions and with double the hunters is incomparable to the situation we have today. And when the 6 point season was introduced in the late 90s, harvest was indeed down, because of the die-off from the 1997 winter and the DiMarchi-ism hangover. Rebuilding of the herd with the subsequent mild winters and the curtailment of calf permits is responsible for the increase in 6 point harvest in the following years. What HAS the Branch done with our licensing monies the past 5 years, since Mr Campbell has earmarked them for use in game management??? Not inventory work obviously.

[Elkaholic]

I think BC should take a look at our friends to the south and see how they hunt elk. Most gun seasons don't start until oct. With archery all of sept. I personally would love to see a long archery season in favor of a shorter open gun season. I know most people would be against this as they "perceive" this and a loss of opportunity. I don't, as archery is one of the fastest growing sports right now, archers want more time and opportunity. And by moving the gun season out of the main rut I think that the herds would do very well, so that come oct you could support a 3pt gun season as most archers will shoot the first legal bull that comes in to say "Hi". I don't know if I am alone on these feelings and do not really care. I would love to see something along those lines one day. But the way things are done here in BC you will never see a change to gun season length. And it would be the hunters against hunters argument. IMHO.

[Seeadler]

There is nothing stopping archers right now from hunting from September 1 to October 20th.

Going to a longer archery season at the expence of the current any method (rifle, bow, muzzleloader) as it is now will only decrease hunter numbers, the number of people who would trade a rifle for a bow is quite small i think.

[bighornbob]

Are people not reading Fishers posts:

If there are just as many elk as in the 80's and there are 1/2 the hunters, why cant ther be a season like there was in the 80's (3 point or better from Sept. 10-Oct. 20)..

What killed off the elk in the early 90's was 6000 calf tags and a couple bad winters.

BHB

[Seeadler]

Are people not reading Fishers posts:

If there are just as many elk as in the 80's and there are 1/2 the hunters, why cant ther be a season like there was in the 80's (3 point or better from Sept. 10-Oct. 20)..

What killed off the elk in the early 90's was 6000 calf tags and a couple bad winters.

BHB

I think that success rates/harvest numbers would have to be compared, just because licences were sold does not mean that people were actually out hunting, or actually got anything.

[Elkaholic]

There is nothing stopping archers right now from hunting from September 1 to October 20th.

Going to a longer archery season at the expence of the current any method (rifle, bow, muzzleloader) as it is now will only decrease hunter numbers, the number of people who would trade a rifle for a bow is quite small i think.

Well I would say every year here in Cranbrook there is more and more archers, be it xbow or compound or trad. With a longer season it would encourage more people to hunt with bows, as they see the opportunity to harvest some meat is greatly increased. And no there isn't anything stopping people from hunting with archery right now, but why would you when you have to get a 6pt and have to get him close, just pack your gun because you do not want to miss and opportunity at one. The 6pt season is killing our hunter numbers, just look at all the senior hunters who I bet a lot have not bought a license in years. They see a season where they can actually get some meat and wow they are everywhere. Its all about more opportunity. And I have only been archery hunting for 2 years now, and I would be more than willing to have a shorter gun season to allow for a longer archery ONLY season.

[Seeadler]

I would be more than willing to have a shorter gun season to allow for a longer archery ONLY season.

In essence then you want more opportunity for yourself at the expence of others.

I don't believe for a second that a longer bow season at the cost of a shorter GOS will increase hunter numbers.

[Elkaholic]

I think that success rates/harvest numbers would have to be compared, just because licences were sold does not mean that people were actually out hunting, or actually got anything.

There was double the amount of bulls shot in those days then there are now and it was sustainable every year. Most people are meat hunters hunting in a trophy managed season. If it was 3pt you would see alot of bulls get shot sure. But the mature herd bulls would more than likely be left alone more than they are now. And with a 3pt season I bet the quality of the bulls would start to increase again. Look at the Cranbrook big game club, they are consistantly lowering the minimum score for elk since the 80s just so they can keep having enteries. The genetics of our herd are on the decline and shooting the mature breeding stock is the prime reason for this. If people shoot the smaller bulls and leave the mature bulls alone that means that the cows are still being bred and are still producing more bulls.

[kutenay]

I favour much stricter restrictions on cattle being allowed on Crown Land, the elimination of ALL non-resident hunting throughout the Kootenays and the preservation of wildlife habitat from destructive alienation such as ski developments and so forth. I also favour making second "homes" for foreigners illegal and the systematic purchasing of ranches by the government for use as wildlife habitat.

From the East Kootenays to the Boundary country, I see more 5 points with harems than larger bulls and I favour a 3 pt. rule plus a short GOS for Moose. I also favour a return to the old Moose or Elk rule in effect when I started hunting in 1964.

There are not enough Elk, etc. to meet resident's needs, so, let's stop allowing foreigners to kill our wildlife and keep our resources for ourselves. While we are at it, I want to see ALL GO use of Provincial Parks for commercial hunting banned as I was among those who fought to preserve areas such as The Valhallas, The Purcell Conservancy, etc. and this was NOT so GOs could profit from their preservation.

As an aside, does anyone actually know when the revised Wildlife Act will be available to the public?

[Elkaholic]

In essence then you want more opportunity for yourself at the expence of others.

I don't believe for a second that a longer bow season at the cost of a shorter GOS will increase hunter numbers.

No I am not just wanting this opportunity for myself seeadler. I talk to alot of archers and they too want more opportunity for an archery only season. This is the argument I was mentioning is that hunters fight with each other too much. I don't know why we begrudge one another for getting more rights. We are all hunters. Just because you obviously are against archery. Hell I would be for a blackpowder only season, I think they should have one. We all win in the end.

[J_T]

I think BC should take a look at our friends to the south and see how they hunt elk. Most gun seasons don't start until oct. With archery all of sept. I personally would love to see a long archery season in favor of a shorter open gun season. I know most people would be against this as they "perceive" this and a loss of opportunity. I don't, as archery is one of the fastest growing sports right now, archers want more time and opportunity. And by moving the gun season out of the main rut I think that the herds would do very well, so that come oct you could support a 3pt gun season as most archers will shoot the first legal bull that comes in to say "Hi". I don't know if I am alone on these feelings and do not really care. I would love to see something along those lines one day. But the way things are done here in BC you will never see a change to gun season length. And it would be the hunters against hunters argument. IMHO.


Elkaholic, you are not alone. There are many who agree. And there are many who believe this would actually support recruitment and retention. Bowhunting opportunity in the EK has resulted in a huge increase in bowhunters.


There is nothing stopping archers right now from hunting from September 1 to October 20th.
Seeadler, to quote: "For those who understand, no explanation is necessary and for those who do not, none is possible."

[Kirby]

No I am not just wanting this opportunity for myself seeadler. I talk to alot of archers and they too want more opportunity for an archery only season. This is the argument I was mentioning is that hunters fight with each other too much. I don't know why we begrudge one another for getting more rights.

The issue is that you choose to hunt with a bow. Why should a personal choice be refelcted by limiting those who choose otherwise?

There are alot of archers who want archery only seasons, that doesn't make it the best choice. It seems like if you bitch and moan enough you get what you want regardless of how intellegent(or un-intellegent) the idea is.


We are all hunters. Just because you obviously are against archery.

If we are all hunters why are archers bitching so much about being special and requiring a special season?

Kirby

[Seeadler]

No I am not just wanting this opportunity for myself seeadler. I talk to alot of archers and they too want more opportunity for an archery only season. This is the argument I was mentioning is that hunters fight with each other too much. I don't know why we begrudge one another for getting more rights. We are all hunters. Just because you obviously are against archery. Hell I would be for a blackpowder only season, I think they should have one. We all win in the end.

There is nothing stopping archers from hunting right now, in fact they have the longest season of all. Not just for elk, look at whitetail, Sept 1 to Dec 20. What you are talking about is taking opportunity away from people.

Also, I have absolutely nothing against archers, in fact one of the projects I have in mind is making my own bow and trying to get an animal with it. I just don't think that in order for me to do this that I need to take hunting days away from others. I don't have anything against black powder either, I just don't think a special season is needed.

[BCrams]

Hell I would be for a blackpowder only season, I think they should have one. We all win in the end.

Why have a blackpowder only season? There is no need for it. Just as you can choose to hunt with a bow all season, you can also tell yourself "This is a fine day to take out the blackpowder gun." and go use it.

As mentioned many times, creating bow only, blackpowder only or any similar season is restrictive and we are moving away from that.

By all means, continue hunting with archery gear. You're darned lucky to be able to start your seasons early and go later with archery equipment.

[Elkaholic]

I just really think that archery is blowing up right now and it would help us attract and retain more hunter numbers. Think what you want of it, it is my opinion and I am entitled to it. I am by no way bitching and moaning I am just offering up "IDEAS" that could help with hunter numbers. And in turn that would help us all. This will be the last post I make about archery issue, so back to the MT and 6pt needs to be changed.

[BCrams]

I just really think that archery is blowing up right now and it would help us attract and retain more hunter numbers. Think what you want of it, it is my opinion and I am entitled to it. I am by no way bitching and moaning I am just offering up "IDEAS" that could help with hunter numbers. And in turn that would help us all. This will be the last post I make about archery issue, so back to the MT and 6pt needs to be changed.

Those that want to archery hunt and are interested in archery hunting already know they can hunt all season with one!! Isn't that something to be able to have such a season and choice of weapon to hunt with!! To be able to go down to the outdoor room and say to yourself - eenie meanie minie moe I choose the bow this morning. The pet .50 calibre will have its turn tonight and sorry .270 you'll have to wait until next weekend.

Then again a person who is archery only, is blessed with the longest seasons over the entire fall!!

Explain to me (us) how having a weapon restricted season would help attract more hunters? Especially when they can already hunt with archery gear or black powder or rifle of their choosing ?

[Kirby]

Explain to me (us) how having a weapon restricted season would help attract more hunters? Especially when they can already hunt with archery gear or black powder or rifle of their choosing ?

Damn it BCRams stop being logical:eek:... your wrecking their arguments:lol:!

Kirby

[Seeadler]

I imagine that I would be excluded from a black powder season with my BPCR that I can take out anytime between Sept 10 and Oct 20.

Back to the 6 point topic though, if the herd can support a 3 point season, I can see no reason not to go for it. I have no idea if it could be supported but as far as hunter numbers, a 3 point elk season and a more liberal moose season with a limit of one or the other would do more for recruitment and retainment of hunters than any sort of special weapons season.

[Elkaholic]

The only reason that most archers enjoy the archery only season is because its "Archery Only" no worry of guns or anything. That is one of the biggest pet peeves of archers. I know it may seem insignificant but it means a lot to many. And I agree with you BCRams that we are blessed with the longest season, and the ability to hunt with any weapon of choice after the 10th. After giving some thought to what everyone has said, I think that in light of changing the length or restricting the weapon of any season, a change from 6pt to 3pt would also achieve the same purpose. As you don't have to worry as much if you get a bull in close "is it a 6pt".

[Fisher-Dude]

I hope not to get side tracked by the archery issue, as too often I'm accused of being "anti-bow". I'm not anti-bow, I'm pro-opportunity. How about this Elkaholic: Archery only: any elk Sept 1 - 9, 3 point Sept 10 - Oct 20, and any elk Oct 21 - Oct 31, with the last part of the archery season under 1100 metres to deal with the problem farm elk.

Concurrent with this would be GOS 3 point Sept 10 - Oct 20 for rifle, blackpowder, spearchuckers, blowguns, and slingshots. Special youth/senior opportunities could remain as they are now.

Just throwing this out there...lots of opportunity for everyone, with lots of bow only, and with only half the numbers of hunters and herds healthy, why not?

[Seeadler]

I hope not to get side tracked by the archery issue, as too often I'm accused of being "anti-bow". I'm not anti-bow, I'm pro-opportunity. How about this Elkaholic: Archery only: any elk Sept 1 - 9, 3 point Sept 10 - Oct 20, and any elk Oct 21 - Oct 31, with the last part of the archery season under 1100 metres to deal with the problem farm elk.

Concurrent with this would be GOS 3 point Sept 10 - Oct 20 for rifle, blackpowder, spearchuckers, blowguns, and slingshots. Special youth/senior opportunities could remain as they are now.

Just throwing this out there...lots of opportunity for everyone, with lots of bow only, and with only half the numbers of hunters and herds healthy, why not?

If the herd can support it, I am all for this.

[Elkaholic]

If the herd can support it, I am all for this.

I couldn't agree more. It truly is the 6pt season the gets a lot of Hunters down.

[6616]

There is really not only half the hunting pressure as there used to be in the EK. Granted, there are only half as many hunters in BC, but the hunting pressure in the EK hasn't dropped off proportionally. It's still one of the more popular hunting destinations for residents and non-residents alike.

The current elk population is less then it was in the mid-eighties but the density is higher in good habitat areas because we've got less habitat, elk are more concentrated, there are more roads, we have more predators, elk are overall more vulnerable. That's not to say we cannot sustain a 3 pt hunt, I believe we can, it's just a very hard thing to convince ultra-conservative game managers. We will see a 3pt GOS in the next year or two if things work out, but these things take time, due process must be follwed. but overall, things will never again be like they were in the '70s and '80s, unfortunatelly just too many factors have changed.


I worked in the forest industry in the EK all my life, the clear cutting in the high elevation summer range tributaries was much more prevalent then it is today. The MPB cuts are not in the upper tributaries in elk summer range, but are at mid-elevation and on the benches of the main Trench primarily (where Jack Pine grows), many are in elk migration corridors and seasonal transition ranges, some are even on winter range in low elevation Ponderosa Pine forests. Yes, this harvesting is going to be an asset to the elk in the EK. Yes, the fires of 2003 were an asset to elk also, parts of the Plumbob fire area will not be reforested, rather it will be maintained as an open forest/open grassland site, a good decision.

In spite of fires and MPB harvesting, keep in mind that here in the EK we're losing up to 3000 Ha of grassland/open forest/elk winter range habitat annually to forest encroachment and ingrowth and this has been going on for 5 or 6 decades, we still have a huge net loss of habitat in comparison to the mid-eighties. Elk are quite possibly over carrying capacity and depredation on agricultural land is as high or higher than it's ever been before. In the 1950's there was 250,000 Ha of functional NDT4 eco-system in the EK, we have a little over 100,000 Ha left in a functional grassland state today.

[Thunderstix]

It is just so you can be as frustrated as me up here in Region 7b where most of the elk live.

[Elkaholic]

There is really not only half the hunting pressure as there used to be in the EK. Granted, there are only half as many hunters in BC, but the hunting pressure in the EK hasn't dropped off proportionally. It's still one of the more popular hunting destinations for residents and non-residents alike.

The current elk population is less then it was in the mid-eighties but the density is higher in good habitat areas because we've got less habitat, elk are more concentrated, there are more roads, we have more predators, elk are overall more vulnerable. That's not to say we cannot sustain a 3 pt hunt, I believe we can, it's just a very hard thing to convince ultra-conservative game managers. We will see a 3pt GOS in the next year or two if things work out, but these things take time, due process must be follwed. but overall, things will never again be like they were in the '70s and '80s, unfortunatelly just too many factors have changed.


I worked in the forest industry in the EK all my life, the clear cutting in the high elevation summer range tributaries was much more prevalent then it is today. The MPB cuts are not in the upper tributaries in elk summer range, but are at mid-elevation and on the benches of the main Trench primarily (where Jack Pine grows), many are in elk migration corridors and seasonal transition ranges, some are even on winter range in low elevation Ponderosa Pine forests. Yes, this harvesting is going to be an asset to the elk in the EK. Yes, the fires of 2003 were an asset to elk also, parts of the Plumbob fire area will not be reforested, rather it will be maintained as an open forest/open grassland site, a good decision.

In spite of fires and MPB harvesting, keep in mind that here in the EK we're losing up to 3000 Ha of grassland/open forest/elk winter range habitat annually to forest encroachment and ingrowth and this has been going on for 5 or 6 decades, we still have a huge net loss of habitat in comparison to the mid-eighties. Elk are quite possibly over carrying capacity and depredation on agricultural land is as high or higher than it's ever been before. In the 1950's there was 250,000 Ha of functional NDT4 eco-system in the EK, we have a little over 100,000 Ha left in a functional grassland state today.

I also feel that the cattle everywhere does nothing to help the game. There was a study done on the Caven creek water shed in the 90s and it recommended it be shut down for cattle grazing as it was in disastrous shape. And look what happened... nothing. Until they are willing to deal with the cattle as they are dealing with the elk for the ranchers not much will change.

[Fisher-Dude]

In spite of fires and MPB harvesting, keep in mind that here in the EK we're losing up to 3000 Ha of grassland/open forest/elk winter range habitat annually to forest encroachment and ingrowth and this has been going on for 5 or 6 decades, we still have a huge net loss of habitat in comparison to the mid-eighties. Elk are quite possibly over carrying capacity and depredation on agricultural land is as high or higher than it's ever been before. In the 1950's there was 250,000 Ha of functional NDT4 eco-system in the EK, we have a little over 100,000 Ha left in a functional grassland state today.

Again, I ask what has happened to all of our licensing fees and HCTF monies? Are the HCTF monies being misdirected by game managers who are supplementing their operating budgets with monies earmarked for HABITAT CONSERVATION? Why are we losing critical ungulate habitat at the same time as we are contributing MORE to the HCTF?

Game managers in an unmentioned region that I'm familiar with have been suspected by some of doing inventory work with HCTF monies. That is NOT the purpose of HCTF money. Here are the legislated uses of the Fund:

Payments out of the trust fund
Subject to subsection (2), the trustee may make payments out of the trust fund for one or more of the following:

(a) the conservation or enhancement of biological diversity, fish, fish habitat, wildlife or wildlife habitat;

(b) the acquisition and management of land for the conservation or enhancement of a population of a species of fish or wildlife and its habitat;

(c) the furthering, stimulation and encouragement of knowledge and awareness of fish or wildlife and their habitat, or of the trust fund, by way of promotional, educational or other programs;

(d) the reasonable travelling and out of pocket expenses incurred by members of the board, and by persons advising the trustee or the board, on matters relating to the trust fund, if those persons are not entitled to payment for those expenses from the government;

(e) remuneration for members of the board, other than members who are appointed under section 112 (4) (a), which remuneration is to be paid to a member for each day that the member is engaged in meetings of the board for the purposes of exercising the board's powers and performing its duties under this Part, in the amount prescribed under the regulations;

(f) if the trustee is appointed under section 115 (1), remuneration for the trustee;

(g) services and supplies provided in relation to matters referred to in section 114 (6) (b) and paragraphs (a) to (f) of this subsection or provided to otherwise manage the trust fund.

[6616]

I agree Elkaholic, cattle grazing and range management have huge implications for wildlife management in the EK. We actually have somewhat fewer elk than in the mid-80s, and a few less cattle on the ranges as well, but a whole lot less range to feed them, use levels have not dropped off as much as available habitat has.

Higher densities, too many critters with big guts, not enough grass to fill them, a couple thousand or more homesteader elk that eat off the ranges year around, equates to serious overgrazing in many areas. I read the Craven Creek reports as well but there are even worse situations out there, look at Pickering Hills for example, that range unit / winter range will not recover before I am gone and you are old and grey.

If we want to maintain traditional elk populations and cattle ranching as well, we need large scale restoration of range and habitat. MPB harvesting and natural fires (barring a huge disaster) are just not going to cut it.

Restoration is and has been ongoing for several years now, approximatelly 15,000 Ha has been fully treated, funding has came from RMEF, FWCP as well as HCTF and MOF grants. (HCTF has put over 2 million into this program over the last 6 years Fisher) The agriculture industry is also part of this program, significant funding has came from the Grazing Enhancement Fund. We just need more, we're not keeping up with losses to ingrowth and encroachment let alone increasing the useable range. At $300.00 to $1000.00 per Ha and 100,000 Ha that needs treatment, we need millions of dollars, and the manpower and equipoment to put it to work.

[6616]

See:

http://www.trenchsociety.com/setup/content/Blueprint_for_Action_2006.pdf

[mark4]

I have talked to a few excellent hunters here in the Kootenay's that feel the six-point regulation is a good one. It protects the smaller bulls that still do their fair share of breeding and more bulls reach maturity which is good. It is frustrating when your hunting hard and seeing like five or six different five-points a day -but keep in mind that next year they will probably be six pointers.

[brotherjack]

The six point restriction is a good one IF (big IF) - the goal is to promote trophy class animals, low harvest numbers, and low hunter numbers. I suppose that Guide/Outfitters and trophy-hunters think all that is a good thing. The rest of us (about 90% or so if the studies FD/GG/etc quote from are even vauguely accurate) think antler restrictions suck bigtime, becuase it severely curtails harvest opportunities, and our motiviation to hunt is directly connected to harvest opportunties.

That said - if there was a conservation concern, I would be the first in line to preach that we need to cut harvest. But what we have here is not only a lack of conservation concern - we have an open cow/calf sesaon and big pile's of cow/calf LEH's getting passed around because of landowner complaints and high population numbers.

[The Hermit]

There is really not only half the hunting pressure as there used to be in the EK. Granted, there are only half as many hunters in BC, but the hunting pressure in the EK hasn't dropped off proportionally. It's still one of the more popular hunting destinations for residents and non-residents alike.

Yep this was my guess too. The loss of hunters has been on Vancouver Island, Hope North, and in the Caribou me thinks.

Hunting in the EK last season I was dumbfounded by all the hunting rigs... never seen so many hunters anywhere before.

[Phreddy]

Region 8 is all 6pt or better. It's unfortunate, but there are many factors not made overly public. One of them is that herds tend to weaken with inbreeding over the years, and new blood is transplanted into an area to refresh the gene pool. By limiting the kill to 6pt+ the newer bulls and cows introduced into areas are able to accomplish this.
I discussed the discrepancy that appeared to be happening with 6pt + bull elk, and spike fork bull moose, with our local CO and he made a lot of sense when he explained that where a moose generally gives birth to 2 calves, an elk only has one.
As far as special seasons for archers, etc., I am completely against it, as it is just one more way to divide and conquer all hunters.

[hunter1947]

I myself know that introducing the 6 point season has skyrocketed the elk numbers in the EK ,no dough in my mind.... Having a 6 point season implemented in the past 11 years has alowed more new recruitment no dough at all . So now that the numbers are back up and healthy they should reopen a one week bull season for 3 or better. They the wildlife management for elk could confinsate for that one week ether buy opening the season one week latter or closing the season one week earlier. I hunted the 4-4 region now coming up to 37 years and the numbers were stable all them years at least the area I hunted. The bad winter of 1996 is what domed the elk ,that year in 1996 was a good year for elk the numbers were in good shape till i went there to hunt the next year 1997 ,that year i did not get a bull after filling my tags for 10 years strait. Then the next year they the elk management introduced the 6 point season and it has been in place since then. Look at it this way ,Its like when they bring in LEH on a certain species ,once on LEH always on LEH ,when have you ever heard them doping an LEH once they have one in place on a certain animal species ????. Now its time to change a small portion of the point restrictions on bull elk in the EK.

[Fisher-Dude]

I have talked to a few excellent hunters here in the Kootenay's that feel the six-point regulation is a good one. It protects the smaller bulls that still do their fair share of breeding and more bulls reach maturity which is good. It is frustrating when your hunting hard and seeing like five or six different five-points a day -but keep in mind that next year they will probably be six pointers.

Yeah, that point's been driven home. "Not in my back yard" - the locals who can hunt the elk every day don't want out of region hunters around, despite the fact that all hunting will cease in this province if we don't get recruitment and retention of hunters UP by opening opportunities where there is NO conservation concern.

"Just give us a few more selfish years, we don't care that it will ultimately lead to the death of hunting in the province" - did those "excellent hunters" say that too? Because that's the truth of the situation.

[6616]

I have been told that one of the predominant messages rec'd during the LEH review public consultation process (and coming from all regions of the province) was that locals want special odds and/or increased chances over non-locals in the draw system....!

There needs to be a major attitude shift...these are provincial resources..! If this is really the path we are going down, you coast guys can forget hunting in the interior, and you interior guys can forget salmon fishing at the coast, and GG's predictions will indeed occur.

[GoatGuy]

I myself know that introducing the 6 point season has skyrocketed the elk numbers in the EK ,no dough in my mind.... Having a 6 point season implemented in the past 11 years has alowed more new recruitment no dough at all . So now that the numbers are back up and healthy they should reopen a one week bull season for 3 or better. They the wildlife management for elk could confinsate for that one week ether buy opening the season one week latter or closing the season one week earlier. I hunted the 4-4 region now coming up to 37 years and the numbers were stable all them years at least the area I hunted. The bad winter of 1996 is what domed the elk ,that year in 1996 was a good year for elk the numbers were in good shape till i went there to hunt the next year 1997 ,that year i did not get a bull after filling my tags for 10 years strait. Then the next year they the elk management introduced the 6 point season and it has been in place since then. Look at it this way ,Its like when they bring in LEH on a certain species ,once on LEH always on LEH ,when have you ever heard them doping an LEH once they have one in place on a certain animal species ????. Now its time to change a small portion of the point restrictions on bull elk in the EK.

Don't forget about the cow/calf harvest. You can run bull:cow ratio right down and still have cows being bred and a stable population.

The biggest thing everbody's forgotten is the number of cow/calves being harvested and the LEH went to right around 0 in 97 when the 6 pt season was introduced if I recall correctly.

Resident hunters for elk have dropped off in a big way.
Averaged around 11,000 hunters from 1981-1990

Average 2000-2004 was 4,366 = less than half so more than the decline in resident hunters. I'd imagine it has come up in the last 2 years - mostly because of cow/calf permits.


The 6 pt season isn't needed in the EK today.

[budismyhorse]

Hunting should be an "experience" not just a meat run. Most guys won't argue that putting one in the freezer just adds to the experience but by reading alot of these comments it seems that it may be more important to kill than to just come out and hunt elk for a week or two.

I should say, I live in the EK, so take these comments as you wish, but the 6 pt season saved the elk going on LEH and to us, that is music to our ears. I am not going to get into a pissing match about out of region vs local hunters, but what people have to realize is that what the 6 pt season has done is created a vastly increased hunting "EXPERIENCE". We can go out any given day and see elk. Simple, seeing these buggers in every draw and ridge is an amazing experience. I love having to stop, pull out the scope and size up a bull, it is exciting and you never know when that 6th pt is going to show up. AND THEY DO.

My Point: If you go to a 3pt season, it will be like back when I was a kid, the elk will go nocturnal, and you might go all day and see a couple cows in the morning and maybe a small shy bull. I remember those days, and they were terrible. The same guys who moaned when the 6pt restriction was put in place are the SAME guys who will fight to protect it now, because of what it has done for elk HUNTING, not killing.

you think you have to hunt hard to get a elk now???!!! wait till you see what it would be like a few years into a 3pt season. Nocturnal Elk. You'll wonder what the hell happened in these areas. One hour of hunting in the morning and at dusk and 8 hours of playing cards in the wall tent. good times. Recruitment would drop like a bag of sand if these young guys and gals aren't seeing and hunting elk while they are out. You watch.

I, for one, would like to hunt and see elk every day, it makes that 6pt bull all that much sweeter when things come together.

and oh yeah, I haven't cut a tag myself on an elk since 2003 and couldn't be happier with all the trips since.

[Flinch]

One of them is that herds tend to weaken with inbreeding over the years, and new blood is transplanted into an area to refresh the gene pool. By limiting the kill to 6pt+ the newer bulls and cows introduced into areas are able to accomplish this.

...transplanted...????

been a long while since we did any transplanting to bolster the weakening genes in the Okanagan herds, would be great if we did though. I don't know of any that happened since the 6 point restriction came in (Princeton may be an exception). Please correct me if I am wrong.

[wetcoasthunter]

I hunted the 4-4 region now coming up to 37 years and the numbers were stable all them years at least the area I hunted. The bad winter of 1996 is what domed the elk ,that year in 1996 was a good year for elk the numbers were in good shape till i went there to hunt the next year 1997 ,that year i did not get a bull after filling my tags for 10 years strait.

So if for those 37 years you hunted that area and you could get a bull on a consistent basis, and the population stayed stable (with alot more hunters back in the day), shouldn't we go back to those less restrictive regs if the population has recovered from the bad 1996 winter? It seems to me once a season has restrictions put on it, it takes a miricle to get those restrictions eased off, even when the population can handle added pressure.

And the idea of opening up the season for a single week doesn't make sense to me. It concentrates the hunters in such a way that it can take away from the enjoyment of a hunt, spread it out, makes for a less crowded forrest.

My 2 cents

[Fisher-Dude]

Hunting should be an "experience" not just a meat run. Most guys won't argue that putting one in the freezer just adds to the experience but by reading alot of these comments it seems that it may be more important to kill than to just come out and hunt elk for a week or two.

I should say, I live in the EK, so take these comments as you wish, but the 6 pt season saved the elk going on LEH and to us, that is music to our ears. I am not going to get into a pissing match about out of region vs local hunters, but what people have to realize is that what the 6 pt season has done is created a vastly increased hunting "EXPERIENCE". We can go out any given day and see elk. Simple, seeing these buggers in every draw and ridge is an amazing experience. I love having to stop, pull out the scope and size up a bull, it is exciting and you never know when that 6th pt is going to show up. AND THEY DO.

My Point: If you go to a 3pt season, it will be like back when I was a kid, the elk will go nocturnal, and you might go all day and see a couple cows in the morning and maybe a small shy bull. I remember those days, and they were terrible. The same guys who moaned when the 6pt restriction was put in place are the SAME guys who will fight to protect it now, because of what it has done for elk HUNTING, not killing.

you think you have to hunt hard to get a elk now???!!! wait till you see what it would be like a few years into a 3pt season. Nocturnal Elk. You'll wonder what the hell happened in these areas. One hour of hunting in the morning and at dusk and 8 hours of playing cards in the wall tent. good times. Recruitment would drop like a bag of sand if these young guys aren't seeing and hunting elk while they are out. You watch.

I, for one, would like to hunt and see elk every day, it makes that 6pt bull all that much sweeter when things come together.

and oh yeah, I haven't cut a tag myself on an elk since 2003 and couldn't be happier with all the trips since.

Really? Nocturnal bulls? Funny, because I've hunted the same MU in the EK for elk since 1978, and I never remember "nocturnal" bulls during the 70s, 80s, or mid 90s. My dad hunted that area since the mid-50s and never once spoke of "nocturnal" bulls to me.

What I do remember is our party of 4 being able to harvest an elk or two every year or couple of years. I remember sustainable 3 point hunts with twice the number of hunters in BC as we have now. I remember the hills full of screaming bulls from dawn until 11 am, then from 4 pm til dusk. I remember that about 35 - 40% of the bulls we harvested were 6 points, some of them 300+ class bulls, despite the "hoards of hunters" :roll:. I remember having a realistic chance of success every year, and it was basically weather or "shit happens" that reduced those chances in any given year. I also remember people who hunted the EK who now don't hunt it because they feel it's a waste of time and money.

What I see now is few hunters. I see the same concentrations of elk in the same areas they were 25 years ago. I do see word of "a nice 6 point" in a drainage sometimes causing a footrace to see who can get him, especially by those who have seen nothing but 5 points or smaller for a week or so. I don't see much for elk meat on my table - I've killed one 6 point since the regs were changed and missed one other. That's piss poor for recruitment and retention of hunters, considering over 90% of BC's hunters are meat hunters at heart.

Nocturnal bulls? Time for some reading about the effect of water, food, weather, and sex hormones on the daily activities of bull elk to dispell coffee shop bullshit, methinks. ;)

[model88]

Very well put budismyhorse.

[Fisher-Dude]

...transplanted...????

been a long while since we did any transplanting to bolster the weakening genes in the Okanagan herds, would be great if we did though. I don't know of any that happened since the 6 point restriction came in (Princeton may be an exception). Please correct me if I am wrong.

Princeton only. And the harvest went up exponentially a few years after they did, which is a huge success in my books. When asked why we couldn't do the same for the other reg 8 herds, our good friend Brian Harris said he just had a complaint that some elk in Naramata were eating granny's garden, so despite region 4 offering up homesteader elk for transplanting, there was no way in hell he would consider even the introduction of a few bulls to bolster the gene pool. He's an ass. :mad:

[rocksteady]

[quote=Fisher-Dude;243367] "Not in my back yard" - the locals who can hunt the elk every day don't want out of region hunters around, "


Where do you get this sort of information???? I have never seen such a thing at any Rod and Gun club meeting or in any written submission to the MOE.

May be your take on it, but not necessarily the truth..

[boxhitch]

Fewer hunters means fewer voices. And if B Harris gets his management directives from his tea party partners, instead of gun range cronies, we will remain as is. Maybe its time to go over his head.

[budismyhorse]

Ficher,

I was enjoying reading your opinion until your last quote which is on the aggressive side, relax man.

I agree with your paragraph about the way it used to be, but to be honest that is kind of a selfish way of looking at it. Like you, I know the area so well that we would shoot elk regardless of any restriction put in place or not. I am thinking of what it would be like for Other Hunters and rookies to come here and hunt. Why?? well because they have a right to these elk as well. Don't give me your we shot this and my pappi never told me that, that is ignorant to other out of region, or local rookie hunters, who are just as important to this sport.

I personally don't believe that a 3 pt season would be as bad as I put it in my prevous post, and I don't think it would be as good as you state it was. Just trying to convey my point of the experience around elk hunting. I have done my research and don't know what a coffee shop looks like, I am just offering an opinion.

Unexperienced hunters (rookies or out of region) usually hit the standard elk areas, and if those places get lit up like a christmas tree whenever a 3pt bull sticks his nose out, there won't be much going on throughout the day, not really nocturnal (if your going to be a jerk about it), but they would be tougher to hunt and a tougher experience for this group of hunters.

Myself, and you and your pops will always hunt the less traffic areas and do just fine. Just looking out for the other hunters buddy.

[sfire436]

I have heard alot on this thread of people seeing younger bulls hosting a harem of cows. I have hunted the east koots as well and although I feel that may be true sometimes, I still believe that more often than not there is a mature bull very close who just chooses not to show himself because he is cursed with having that sixth point, but he is there. What do you think?

[rocksteady]

Not necessarily sfire436....

Late in teh season last year I did the superstalk on a herd and had 2 bulls scrapping in front of me at about 50 yards.....One had a big rack, the other had a small one......Assumed (stupid me) that the larger bull was a 6 and the other was a 5.....

Small one left with the herd and the larger laid down and had a rest....He was a very solid 5, but had a very small split on top that was so close to being a 6th.....I could not be sure so let him walk away.....

Hustled and stalked in on the herd with the smaller bull....5pt.....But in much better physical shape, the first bull had huge chunks of hair missing and was dragging his feet with fatigue.....

I think what had happened is the younger bull kicked the others arse and took over his harem, as the old guy was tired.....I think this changing of the guard happens on a regular basis all season long....The satellites rest up and get enough energy to overthrow the king and then a few days later, another change occurs....

I have seen large 3 points running a harem and the satellite bull being a 5....Might be just for a day or 2, but body size and health has more to do with who is the master, than the number of points....

[sfire436]

It is interesting to note however, that 25 to 30 years ago there was more than two times the hunters there is now and almost ZERO leh hunts. I didn't hear about anyone complaining then. LEH canbe great but Ifeel they are used too much. If people feel thisway about the six point restriction in the ek then do somethingaboutit and call the CO office.

[sfire436]

thanks rock steady. I had ny chance at a six point the first morning of my hunt in wasa lake and blew it like a rookie with my saftey on, so I think I'm just still really pissed off at the whole east kootney area. Can you blame me though?

[rocksteady]

You have no idea how many stalks I have blown or had go sideways for one reason or another...but that's hunting...Try not to hold a grudge, learn from your mistakes and move on.....

[DWH]

I've been reading this post and finally had to chime in. As a relatively inexperienced hunter, I headed to the EK with an experienced hunter last fall. Currently we live in the Lower Mainland but are transplanted here from the interior, one day hoping to return to a smaller, close-knit community like we were raised in. We met up with another close friend, his father and his uncle (all of whom grew up in or near the area we hunted).

The amazing scenery, the number and variety (different species) of animals we either saw, heard or came across, camp camaraderie, the people we met, all contributed to the hunt of lifetime. During a time when the bulls didn't make a peep (between pre and main rut), us two Lower Mainlanders still managed two 6-pointers. Saw alot of others too. But don't think it didn't ake alot of effort, we covered alot of territory on foot over the 4-5 days we hunted. This successful hunt may bias my opinion but the age-old adage 'if it ain't broke...' seems to apply here. Even discussing this thread with my friend and his Dad and uncle from the area revealed that they believe the 6-point restriction is the best thing that could have happened up there and that they fully support keeping it (and only it) in place.

On another point pertaining to the notion that locals should have better odds, what is the difference between local and non-local when it comes to the resource? Do the locals contribute more than non-locals to the conservation of the animals targeted? No, they don't pay more for licenses, tags, LEH's, etc... In fact, it is the non-locals that contribute more to the local economy than locals do themselves.

Finally, IMHO, anyone who is willing to get off their quads or out of there vehicles and be willing to put in some level of effort will have success in the EK's.

[Patiently waiting to see who will be the first to rip on me for this post.]

[sfire436]

No i wont. lol

[sfire436]

think you hit some good points DWH. Itwould be interesting to see how many of those are actually not getting of their quads. But I would still say that your sucsess was not indicative of most peoples hunts. And that you had beginners luck or just a great season. Takecare

[Fisher-Dude]

Fewer hunters means fewer voices. And if B Harris gets his management directives from his tea party partners, instead of gun range cronies, we will remain as is. Maybe its time to go over his head.

Where do we go? Matthews? Carmichael? Ethier? Wilkins? Penner? Campbell? God? Seems there's a reluctance by our lobby groups to call him out at any of these levels.

I think the same can be said about effecting change throughout the province. Our game is a PROVINCIAL resource, and should be managed for the good of the province as a whole. The current practice of local clubs dictating local seasons is, IMO, flawed. While I work hard in region 8 to initiate hunting and fishing regulations changes to benefit our youth and bring families out of the house and into the mountains with gun/bow/SPINNING ROD WITH WORMS (go figure!), I get frustrated at the protectionist attitudes of groups in other regions. I want "coastal warriors" to bring their kids to region 8 and hunt the youth seasons and fish the local lakes. Why can't other regions get on board and do the same thing?

[DWH]

that you had beginners luck or just a great season. Takecare

Maybe a bit of both but reports from others (through my friend from the area and the local butcher) indicated that there was alot of success, When we were on our way out of town one butcher said he had about the same if not more than at the same time in previous years.

While I'm not combating the fact that some people may not have seen much, I just want to support the other side of the spectrum by adding support to there being lots of animals. In the 3.5 days we actually hunted, we came across 5 bulls, 4 were legal (of which 2 came home with us), but most importantly we saw a ton of sign.

[sfire436]

Got room for another hunter next season?????? lol

[KevinB]

While I'm not combating the fact that some people may not have seen much, I just want to support the other side of the spectrum by adding support to there being lots of animals..

Not to speak for anyone else, but I don't think that's the debate...there are lots of elk in the EK and no-one here is saying that there aren't. I think the debate is over what to do with them....at least that's what I'm getting out of all this?

[Fisher-Dude]

Not to speak for anyone else, but I don't think that's the debate...there are lots of elk in the EK and no-one here is saying that there aren't. I think the debate is over what to do with them....at least that's what I'm getting out of all this?

You're right on track Kevin. We have record high game populations, record high hunting restrictions, and record low hunter numbers. Something ain't addin' up!

Here's another thing to add to the mix: agriculture producers are lobbying hard to be able to shoot any marauding elk (or other species for that matter) whenever they want, in whatever numbers they want. Do we want to see the resource "managed" in such a way, or do we want to create hunting opportunities with enough hunter numbers in order to control the elk population through hunting? My hat's off to the agriculture community for their ability to lobby and get results - even though I strongly disagree with this initiative. Imagine hunting opportunities in BC where we could lobby and get those kinds of results!

[KevinB]

Hunting should be an "experience" not just a meat run.

Who says? Please don't try to tell me what kind of "experience" I should or should not get out of hunting. I'm not going to tell you what kind of experience you should get out of hiking, playing tennis, or getting it on with your main squeeze.


what the 6 pt season has done is created a vastly increased hunting "EXPERIENCE"

yes it sure has. By your definition it is a better experience now. But not by most other's definition - you are way in the minority.


My Point: If you go to a 3pt season, it will be like back when I was a kid, the elk will go nocturnal, and you might go all day and see a couple cows in the morning and maybe a small shy bull. I remember those days, and they were terrible.

So is this why there were more than twice the number of elk hunters in the EK than there are now? I'm not getting you logic...:confused: Again, it was terrible for you, but obviously it wasn't, for most of other 11,000 elk hunters that there were before the restrictions were put in place.


you think you have to hunt hard to get a elk now???!!! wait till you see what it would be like a few years into a 3pt season. Nocturnal Elk. You'll wonder what the hell happened in these areas. One hour of hunting in the morning and at dusk and 8 hours of playing cards in the wall tent. good times. Recruitment would drop like a bag of sand if these young guys and gals aren't seeing and hunting elk while they are out. You watch.

11,000 hunters then, 4,300 hunter now...explain exactly what the status quo is doing for retention and recruitment??


I, for one, would like to hunt and see elk every day, it makes that 6pt bull all that much sweeter when things come together. and oh yeah, I haven't cut a tag myself on an elk since 2003 and couldn't be happier with all the trips since.

I feel the same way, mostly (I would like to be the holder of a cut tag, as I live off of game meat). BUT that has absolutely NO BEARING on what other hunters might want...and I would GLADLY have what I might think is a poorer experience (for me) if it meant that there would actually be some hunter recruitment. I want to still enjoy the same opportunities when I'm 70, that I do now, and the only reason that I shouldn't, is because of conservation reasons, and NOT SOMEONE ELSE'S IDEA OF HOW I SHOULD ENJOY MY HUNT (or even whether I should be allowed to hunt)!!!

Now, I'm not at all picking on you Buddyismyhorse, I think you are completely entitled to your opinion and I'm glad that you have one that you have thought about. And, I'm not an elk hunter, and have never hunted in the EK, so you should take my post with a grain of salt. But, I'm seeing a pervasive idea that the hunting is or should be about the "best experience" (whatever that might mean to a given person), and that there are all kinds of existing hunters who are in favour of having things managed so that their idea of a good hunting experience is preserved at the expense of others' experiences.
On the other side are the folks that see what is happening to our hunter numbers, recruitment, and especially political clout, and are worried about this, and think things should be managed such that hunter retention, recruitment, and opportunity are maximized, within the constraints of conservation needs.

I think the first group's ideals are great, and in fact that status quo would be the nicest thing for existing hunters who already know an area well and are already skilled ...but, I am convinced, that although they are well-meaning (mostly for themselves?), doing things their way will eventually lead to the curtailment and/or loss of hunting in B.C... And I would hope that would be everyone's biggest concern.

I just can't see keeping the "I think this is better" attitude, while being faced with this. :confused: I think they tend to have their heads in the sand, as evidenced by how every post seems to ignore the very simple points that have been repeatedly made by GG and FD and others...Bottom line, 90% of hunters are meat hunters, and always have been, and if they don't see a decent chance of success, they won't be hunters...period. And then you can kiss what opportunity you have left, GOODBYE.

Saying that my hunting opportunities should be restricted because of what someone else thinks the hunting "experience" should be for everyone, isn't that far from saying that I shouldn't have ANY hunting experience because someone else thinks that the poor little elk are too cute. Once politicians get comfortable with the first line of reasoning, it isn't that far for them to feel fine about the second line of reasoning....think about that.


As an analogy, I am a pretty avid mountain biker in the "off season" :wink: . I am more than happy to see out of towners and new riders show up and ride on "our" local trails. I'll give them directions, tips, etc. The more people are out there riding, the more new riders there are, the better, as mtn. bikers are starting to get a lot of pressure, and are getting trails closed , etc...if we actually have a lot of people doing the sport, and we all work together, we might actually be able to ensure that there are areas where we can enjoy our sport in the long term. The trouble is, things in mtn. biking are sometimes exactly the same as in hunting...the downhillers, freeriders, cross-country riders, people building different trails, etc., as often as not are at each others throats because they all think that everyone should mountain bike in the same way and for the same reasons. Luckily things are improving in many areas and we are starting to "speak" more with one voice, and we have had successes in getting decision makers to listen to that voice. The way things are going, I'll be able to ride my mountain bike in the woods, long after I am no longer allowed to hunt.

Anyway, good luck elk hunting next fall. I know I won't be doing any...I'll be too busy trying to get a couple of new deer hunters out there shooting, and hunting for deer in the short any-buck season.:wink:

[sfire436]

I'm with kev.

[horshur]

Good post Kevin!!!!

[ruttinbuck]

Gents I am not wearing my tinfoil hat yet...
However with a little help form our own local only greed,we are being politically managed right out of our sport.Hunter numbers are at record lows,animal numbers are at all time highs,our seasons are being restricted more and more.Once its not viable as manageable financially,we will not be hunting period.It is alot easier to manage farmers doing crop damage control than managing shrinking numbers of hunters.
The quickest way IMO to recruit hunters and bring back guys that won't hunt anymore is to reopen some lower point restrictions and new or junior hunter seasons.That said we can't just open up the whole province, however some areas recovering nicely may need to be opened 3pt for bull elk and other areas because of geographics or access might need to be left 4pt or better buck seasons.
We either all hunt together or we won't be hunting at all.RB

[Fisher-Dude]

Here's a thought:

IF the 6 point restriction on E Kootenay elk gets changed to a 3 point season, I think it would be totally hypocritical for ANY of the 6 point season proponents to kill anything other than 6 point elk. That includes all the local reg 4 club members/reps who spoke out so strongly against the season being liberalized.

So, Model88, budismyhorse, etc, make sure you only shoot 6 pointers eh?:wink:

[BCrams]

I agree with Fisher Dude. If there is a 3 pt bull elk season, you do not need to shoot a smaller bull. You can still pursue 6 pt bulls like you already do.

[model88]

Not a problem Fisher-Dude and those of you who want a 3 point season opened, make sure you only shoot 3 points:biggrin:

[Fisher-Dude]

Not a problem Fisher-Dude and those of you who want a 3 point season opened, make sure you only shoot 3 points:biggrin:

The season I'm promoting is "3 point or better", just like you're hunting "6 point or better". ;)

Ya can't tell me you'd let an Imperial walk? :D

[J_T]

Going out on a limb here.... hope I don't get pushed off.

There are only a few ways that seasons are proposed and decisions made on the direction to pursue. The BCWF is well represented at the Wildlife Advisory committee meetings. IF the BCWF were supportive of a 3 point season, it would stand a better chance of moving forward.

If you are, a BCWF member, local or a member from another region, then I would suggest you speak to someone.

At the Reg 4 wildlife meetings, the bowhunters of this province supported a 10 day 3 pt elk season in the East Kootenay. GOS

Have you asked the BCWF how they represented you?

[BCrams]

Going out on a limb here.... hope I don't get pushed off.

There are only a few ways that seasons are proposed and decisions made on the direction to pursue. The BCWF is well represented at the Wildlife Advisory committee meetings. IF the BCWF were supportive of a 3 point season, it would stand a better chance of moving forward.

If you are, a BCWF member, local or a member from another region, then I would suggest you speak to someone.

At the Reg 4 wildlife meetings, the bowhunters of this province supported a 10 day 3 pt elk season in the East Kootenay. GOS

Have you asked the BCWF how they represented you?

GG or Fisher may be able to answer this one as far as BCWF representation for the 3 pt season.

[budismyhorse]

yikes KevinB, i didn't mean to try and tell you how to enjoy your hunt. I didn't think people were so serious about capital letters and quote marks....by no means am I one of those guys, I'll watch that from now on.

I really agree with most of what you are saying, but I will just say this.

I think, the reason the hunter numbers are not the same as they used to be, IN MY OPINION, is not because of poor success, it is merely a change in demographic. The older folks now made up the majority then, and they don't hunt anymore. Why? I don't know, ask them. Most tell me its because they are too old to pack elk or are just done with it. Thousands of hunters MIA since the 80's isn't because of the 6pt season, they are just not hunting anymore. Moved off, doing other stuff with family, that kind of thing. What I see out there is less hunters, but the ones that are out there are serious. But don't relying on putting meat in the freezer as much as back in the day.

Back before the internet and video games, hunting was a major form of entertainment for kids and now, well there are just so many other things out there for kids. Just like enrollment in Forestry is dwindling, hunting is kind of a sport that people think is archaic and modern kids of today have a hard time relating it to fun.

So I don't personally think that the key to recruitment is through harvest, I truly think it's through the experience of it all. Look at Bow Hunting, it is exploding and that sure as heck isn't a meat sport.

Sticking to the point of this thread, if we go to 3pts in the EK for bulls, I feel that elk hunting would suffer due to smarter elk (like back in the 80's) and it might be tougher to keep people interested in hunting if there isn't much action going on. I'd rather wade through 5pts than glass empty hillsides is what I am trying to say.

I really don't think young kids want to kill something for it to be fun, they just want to get out and have some action. Short attention spans and all.

Hey man, I could be wrong, and probably am, but I think the point of this is a discussion, and I am enjoying other peoples opinions.

Now allow me to go back through this and make sure I don't offend anyone, or heaven forbid, put out a different point of view.

Let me also say that treating hunting like anything less than meat trips is dangerous and it gives greenies ammo to shut us down with regards to trophy hunting and crap like that. I know meat should come before experience however, I really think that there has to be a balance between the two and a 6pt season for elk is that balance.

[DWH]

11,000 hunters then, 4,300 hunter now...explain exactly what the status quo is doing for retention and recruitment??



When you say status quo, what about the jr./sr. opportunities? Is this season not an attempt (albeit maybe not the best approach) to provide more opportunities and encourage recruitment, especially in providing newer (i.e. younger) hunters with success.

[J_T]

Hunting, access, people, weapons, wildlife. All change over time. I'm not so sure we can use stats from the past to manage our approach to the future.

There are many more stakeholders, many more roads, fences, there is much more access to information. And it all comes together suggesting that what we did in the 70's, 80's or 90's is unique to what we might do, or should do today. I don't think the arguement that we have less hunters, and/or more elk is suffice in its simplicity.

[budismyhorse]

Here's a thought:

IF the 6 point restriction on E Kootenay elk gets changed to a 3 point season, I think it would be totally hypocritical for ANY of the 6 point season proponents to kill anything other than 6 point elk. That includes all the local reg 4 club members/reps who spoke out so strongly against the season being liberalized.

So, Model88, budismyhorse, etc, make sure you only shoot 6 pointers eh?:wink:

I've never let a 6pt go in my life, mostly because they are hard to get, and if 3pts become tough to get, I'll plug them just the same.

That isn't hypocritical, that is just hunting. You hunt and kill what you can, I don't see it anyother way. I usually let 10-20 whitey bucks go every year, because they are everywhere and I like to hunt them later on. If 3pt bulls were easy like that, I would let them go too. You really lost me on the hypocritical notion. I am not rallying against 3pt season so I can shoot big elk.....I don't think anyone is.....

[GoatGuy]

GG or Fisher may be able to answer this one as far as BCWF representation for the 3 pt season.

It's a democracy.

Members-clubs-regions.

It's a bottom up approach.

You go by what the clubs want.

[KevinB]

When you say status quo, what about the jr./sr. opportunities? Is this season not an attempt (albeit maybe not the best approach) to provide more opportunities and encourage recruitment, especially in providing newer (i.e. younger) hunters with success.

By status quo, I am referring to the current 6-pt restriction for GOS, regular joe rifle hunters. I agree totally, the jr. seasons etc. are a good start to recruiting more hunters. but it doesn't do much to recruit anyone older than that. The senior seasons are likewise a great way to keep some in the game who otherwise might quit. But I would say more needs to be done if we are serious about increasing hunter numbers significantly.

[GoatGuy]

Hunting, access, people, weapons, wildlife. All change over time. I'm not so sure we can use stats from the past to manage our approach to the future.

There are many more stakeholders, many more roads, fences, there is much more access to information. And it all comes together suggesting that what we did in the 70's, 80's or 90's is unique to what we might do, or should do today. I don't think the arguement that we have less hunters, and/or more elk is suffice in its simplicity.

True, we also have more cars and their harvest has certainly gone up - they seem to be hungry, lets keep on feeding them. :p

If you have the animals, take the harvestable surplus. The job of wildlife managers should be to manage wildlife, not people and their Christmas wish list. Nor is it to deal with unsubstantiated and unsupported facts.

Input should be for discussion about conservation not about "WHAT I WANT." Sign of the times I suppose.

Decoded conversation

Me, me, me ............................................me.... .......................me.....
........................me.............me.......me .me.me..........me........me...me:redface:

__________________________________________________ _____________

Everytime you put an antler restrictions on elk/moose/deer YOU WILL KILL OFF HUNTERS - it really couldn't be any simpler. Find that in every province and state across North America.

[Fisher-Dude]

yikes KevinB, i didn't mean to try and tell you how to enjoy your hunt. I didn't think people were so serious about capital letters and quote marks....by no means am I one of those guys, I'll watch that from now on.

I really agree with most of what you are saying, but I will just say this.

I think, the reason the hunter numbers are not the same as they used to be, IN MY OPINION, is not because of poor success, it is merely a change in demographic. The older folks now made up the majority then, and they don't hunt anymore. Why? I don't know, ask them. Most tell me its because they are too old to pack elk or are just done with it. Thousands of hunters MIA since the 80's isn't because of the 6pt season, they are just not hunting anymore. Moved off, doing other stuff with family, that kind of thing. What I see out there is less hunters, but the ones that are out there are serious. But don't relying on putting meat in the freezer as much as back in the day.

Back before the internet and video games, hunting was a major form of entertainment for kids and now, well there are just so many other things out there for kids. Just like enrollment in Forestry is dwindling, hunting is kind of a sport that people think is archaic and modern kids of today have a hard time relating it to fun.

So I don't personally think that the key to recruitment is through harvest, I truly think it's through the experience of it all. Look at Bow Hunting, it is exploding and that sure as heck isn't a meat sport.

Sticking to the point of this thread, if we go to 3pts in the EK for bulls, I feel that elk hunting would suffer due to smarter elk (like back in the 80's) and it might be tougher to keep people interested in hunting if there isn't much action going on. I'd rather wade through 5pts than glass empty hillsides is what I am trying to say.

I really don't think young kids want to kill something for it to be fun, they just want to get out and have some action. Short attention spans and all.

Hey man, I could be wrong, and probably am, but I think the point of this is a discussion, and I am enjoying other peoples opinions.

Now allow me to go back through this and make sure I don't offend anyone, or heaven forbid, put out a different point of view.

Let me also say that treating hunting like anything less than meat trips is dangerous and it gives greenies ammo to shut us down with regards to trophy hunting and crap like that. I know meat should come before experience however, I really think that there has to be a balance between the two and a 6pt season for elk is that balance.

Bud, I guess you haven't read the Zeman report on WHY hunter numbers have declined. Here's the link, please read it carefully.

http://peachlandsportsmen.com/declininghunters.pdf

Take note of:

Opportunities and Seasons - Factors that discouraged hunting are:

GOS changed to LEH
The LEH system itself
Limited hunting opportunities available
Restrictive regulations
Antler restrictions
Access considerations
Number of legal animals

Also:


5.9 Key factors that deter current hunters

The potential and perceived potential of success has demonstrated that trophy seasons have negatively affected participation for meat and meat, then selective hunters.

[KevinB]

yikes KevinB, i didn't mean to try and tell you how to enjoy your hunt. I didn't think people were so serious about capital letters and quote marks....by no means am I one of those guys, I'll watch that from now on.

Hey, don't worry, I wasn't getting personal :wink:, I realized that you didn't intend to outright tell anyone how to hunt. But nevertheless, you did, if inadvertently - "Hunting should be an experience not just a meat run". Hey, I agree, I think the experience is the best part (closely followed by a full freezer!), but the point is, that's just for me, and I'm not going to use that line of thinking to argue for a certain type of management. My girlfriend is the exact opposite - she would be perfectly happy if she could drive to the city limits, find her deer tied to a tree, hit it over the head with a rock, and stick it in the freezer. I think that's just fine, and she has just as much right to access game resources as everyone else. With a more liberal season, we can all still knock ourselves out and have great and challenging hunts - we can still shoot only 6 pointers if we want, or go backpacking, or otherwise get into areas that aren't over-run with other hunters, whatever. The thing is, for you to keep the exact same experience that you so much enjoy, i.e. less hunters, more elk sightings in easily accessible areas, etc., you have to restrict the opportunities of the majority of other hunters, who do not share your (or my) idea of a quality experience. Hey, that would be great, less hunters and lots of animals that aren't scared of people...yeah, great until the numbers of hunters drops so low that opportunities are further restricted...then you might not be hunting elk in the EK at all.



I think, the reason the hunter numbers are not the same as they used to be, IN MY OPINION, is not because of poor success, it is merely a change in demographic. The older folks now made up the majority then, and they don't hunt anymore. Why? I don't know, ask them. Most tell me its because they are too old to pack elk or are just done with it. Thousands of hunters MIA since the 80's isn't because of the 6pt season, they are just not hunting anymore. Moved off, doing other stuff with family, that kind of thing. What I see out there is less hunters, but the ones that are out there are serious. But don't relying on putting meat in the freezer as much as back in the day.

I don't think you are really referring to demographics - if demographics were the sole driver of hunter numbers, there should still be high numbers. The absolute number of people in BC that are of "prime hunting age", say, between 20 and 50, is (I'm guessing) at least as high as it was 20 years ago, even if they are a smaller proportion of the overall population, just because of population growth. Yeah, there are a lot of older hunters that aren't hunting anymore, and you're asking why...well not all of them quit just because they were too old to hunt. The new people either aren't interested, or don't get hooked on elk hunting after they go out for several years without success, or even seeing a 6-pointer.


Back before the internet and video games, hunting was a major form of entertainment for kids and now, well there are just so many other things out there for kids. Just like enrollment in Forestry is dwindling, hunting is kind of a sport that people think is archaic and modern kids of today have a hard time relating it to fun.

Totally agree with you! And that's exactly why we have to manage to increase hunter recruitment and retention, and the bottom line is that increased opportunities and success = increased recruitment and retention.


So I don't personally think that the key to recruitment is through harvest, I truly think it's through the experience of it all. Look at Bow Hunting, it is exploding and that sure as heck isn't a meat sport.

Yes, but it the experience has to be what most would view as a positive one. And again, for the vast majority, a good chance of harvest success is the main base for a positive experience. How many times does that need to be pointed out?? And r.e. bowhunting - yeah it's exploding, but maybe a big reason for that is because it opens up opportunity? And most serious bowhunters I know are more successful (or could be, if they were prepared to shoot anything legal for meat) than your average joe rifle hunter. Also I don't know, but I would strongly suspect, that most new bowhunters are not new hunters - I think most bowhunters become bowhunters because they are already seriopus hunters, looking either for a more challenging experience, or increased opportunity, or both.


Sticking to the point of this thread, if we go to 3pts in the EK for bulls, I feel that elk hunting would suffer due to smarter elk (like back in the 80's) and it might be tougher to keep people interested in hunting if there isn't much action going on. I'd rather wade through 5pts than glass empty hillsides is what I am trying to say.
Don't worry, I heard you loud and clear the first time. :wink: But again, why were elk hunter numbers in the EK over double what they are now, only about 10 or 11 years later, if everyone's experience then was so crappy, and so great now? Doesn't add up. Not that it is as simple as that, but it is a pretty glaring set of numbers nontheless.



Hey man, I could be wrong, and probably am, but I think the point of this is a discussion, and I am enjoying other peoples opinions.
Now allow me to go back through this and make sure I don't offend anyone, or heaven forbid, put out a different point of view.

Exactly, hey I haven't worried about offending anyone, we're all grown-ups here, and I'm not expecting you to worry about offending me! :wink: Keep up the different points of view, without it things here wouldn't be nearly so much fun. Doesn't mean we can't argue though, and I will if someone writes something that I totaly disagree with, but I don't think that's offensive.


I know meat should come before experience however, I really think that there has to be a balance between the two and a 6pt season for elk is that balance.

Okay we're both sounding like broken records here...yeah that's all great and wonderful, but once again you are imposing your ideas of a quality experience onto others.

[rocksteady]

When you say status quo, what about the jr./sr. opportunities? Is this season not an attempt (albeit maybe not the best approach) to provide more opportunities and encourage recruitment, especially in providing newer (i.e. younger) hunters with success.

If you think the intent of this season was for recruitment and extension of existing hunters, think again.

It was another attempt by the MOE to calm the nerves of the ranching industry who is still saying they are having difficulties with the elk herds damaging their crops. The LEH (private land hunts) were not nearly as successful as they thought it would be:

a) Only a certain number of people per week would hunt the ranch
b) After about the 2nd week the elk went nocturnal and fed in the fields all night
c) Landowners were having problems with "slob" hunters and all hunters suffered.

If this truly would have been for jr/senior recruit/extension, it would have been in the whole EK, not just below 1100m....

You guys have no idea how much power the KLA (Kootenay Livestock Association) has around here and an MLA in their hip pocket to boot...

[Fisher-Dude]

If this truly would have been for jr/senior recruit/extension, it would have been in the whole EK, not just below 1100m....



Well taken point RS. However, can you imagine the uproar from the "protectionist" locals if the MoE had said that these seasons would be for all of the EK? Hell, they don't want people out hunting bull elk, let alone cows and calves! I think the MoE was only able to do a "sales job" to the vocal Opponents of Opportunity by using the 1100m justification. In my mind, it SUCKS huge that game managers have to tip-toe around these mal-informed NIMBYs instead of just doing what is right for the herd and for hunter opportunity.

Think of it this way - we were all pissed off when the NDP banned all grizzly hunts based purely on politics instead of science. Is it any different now when we deny hunting opportunity to appease vocal opponents instead of using the science which indicates that the herd can easily withstand a 3 point or better bull season?

[J_T]

FD, keep in mind, the first year MOE moved the archery only season for elk in the EK that it was any elk, anywhere. What they found was guys where not targeting the lowland/homesteaders, so they revised it.

It's a combination opportunity and management. Balance is not always easy to find. Personally, I preferred the any elk any where. Wonder why.

[J_T]

You guys have no idea how much power the KLA (Kootenay Livestock Association) has around here and an MLA in their hip pocket to boot...

Yup, interesting comment. Notice how the KLA is converting? To the KDA - Kootenay Developers Association. Realizing that ranching doesn't compare to holding land and developing it for small recreational land packages. Even the purple lady is involved in developing land.

[bayou]

Fisher dude I see this thread has been brought back up now I always wondered about your surveys and #s and I dont have time to read the link you posted (maybe on weekend) I checked one area on the mail out survey if I read it right your survey is based only on okanogan residents is this correct.

[rocksteady]

[quote=J_T;243682]FD, keep in mind, the first year MOE moved the archery only season for elk in the EK that it was any elk, anywhere. What they found was guys where not targeting the lowland/homesteaders, so they revised it.

quote]


I am not sure if this statement is correct, IIRC the any elk during archery has always been below 1100m, above it was only any bull...Let me check my old pile of regs...

[Kody94]

Its always amazing to me how a group of generally like minded individuals (ie. we are all passionate about hunting) can have such a variety of viewpoints on a topic and be so firmly entrenched in their opinions.

I am a supporter of the 6 pt season in the EK -- generally. Now I am sure that many of you guys have immediately judged me, and jumped to a number of conclusions about me. :)

Before you crucify me, however, know that I voted in favor of a 3 pt season...albeit a limited one, preferably below 1100 meters and early in the season. And my support of the 6 pt season is not absolute, nor is it for the reasons a few of you guys are already assuming.

Since we are all entitled to our own opinion, and I certainly don't begrudge anyone of of theirs, I thought I might share some of mine....at least, the way I see things, today. Things change, and so do I...the beauty of an open mind. Some of you oughta try it sometime. ;)

Anyway, first off...people saying things like this, really does drive me crazy...


The six point restriction is a good one [if] the goal is to promote trophy class animals, low harvest numbers, and low hunter numbers.

While I can see the fellows point, from his experience, it's certainly an unfair indictment, and not totally the case. Harvest numbers in Region 4 are high. There are practically as many 6pts being taken now their was 3+pt elk taken before the 6pt season started. And there are less hunters...ergo, success rates are up too! So as an individual hunter, your chance of taking a 6 pt today, are probably better than taking a 3pt was 10 years ago. And as a guy who was hunting here for far longer than that, I firmly believe the hunting is way better now than it ever was (can't speak about prior to the 80's though!).

I know "Hunter Recruitment" is a big deal. We all have a significant stake in it. But we don't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater to get it. I have no reason to dispute the results of GoatGuy's study about hunter recruitment and retention in the OK, but I don't believe it captured the whole story. I firmly believe that our hunting culture, and our working culture as well, have changed so much that people are less inclined to take part and less inclined to stay. I think as a group we need to make more effort to bring people into the sport (hence my thread on hunting camps a little while back) and create an environment for them to stay. I think the social aspect of hunting is more important than success rates. But thats just MHO.

And anyone that thinks that the 6 pt season is for trophy hunters, is sadly mistaken. Selective hunters, though....I can buy that. A 6 pt season isn't going to make appreciably more record book animals. But it will allow a lot more bulls to reach a "mature" (using the term loosely) size, by letting them grow a season or two longer than most of them would make it under a 3pt management regime. And it does make more enjoyable hunting for those that do it for enjoyment (which even all the die-hard meat hunters I KNOW appreciate -- granted there are others that don't give a hoot...they just want their freezer full).....good bull numbers, especially with a couple years under their belt, makes for rutting behaviour like they evolved to have it. Good for elk, and pretty good for hunting (again, if you care).

I get a kick out of comments like this too...



Decoded conversation

Me, me, me ............................................me.... .......................me.....
........................me.............me.......me .me.me..........me........me...me


I am going to bet that just as many proponents of opening the season up to 3 or better...for "conservation" or "recruitment/retention" reasons, are actually for it so they can fill their freezer, and really for no other reason than that. They don't like the fact they haven't been lucky, or haven't figured out how to kill 6pts (which is not too darn hard these days), and just care about themselves and their empty freezer. Woe is me.

"Me, me, me" is a problem, don't get me wrong, but it cuts both ways. There are a lot of pots calling kettles black around here.

Anyway, back to my opinion on the 6 pt season itself. I would prefer that the gov't managers take a more active approach to managing the game numbers, hunter opportunity, recruitment/retention strategies, etc. Having a 6pt season forever is not what we need. Mix it up a bit. I belive we do have enough bulls to allow some 3pt hunting without making much of dent in the overall population, or affecting others chances at mature bulls, or affecting rutting behaviour (again -- I still remember the mid 90's) and cow/calf ratios...so why not? Maybe we could try a 5pt and better season for a couple years instead?? Or maybe we put out a whack of 3 pt and better LEHs for specific MUs or parts thereof...so you'd have a good chance at one every year or two at the most. My point is that we over simplify....we can probably have our cake and eat it too if we use our imagination a bit.

Well, I've rattle on enough for tonite...my 2cents and change!

Cheers
4Ster

[Kody94]

If there is a 3 pt bull elk season, you do not need to shoot a smaller bull. You can still pursue 6 pt bulls like you already do.

BCRams, I am going to guess that you did not hunt in the EK much from about '90 to '96. :) 6 pt bulls were a rare find. Hell, raghorns were tough hunting! A lot of guys remember that very well, and don't want to go back. I can't blame them.

And that's not "me, me, me" IMHO. How will re-creating the poor hunting of the mid-90's help with recruitment?? We have to be careful. Adhoc lifting of antler restrictions will not necessarily be the silver bullet...a couple years of very high success rates followed by a drought won't help any of us.

Cheers
4Ster.

[model88]

Well put SSSSter.

[Kody94]

It's a combination opportunity and management. Balance is not always easy to find.

Excellent point J_T. Given the generally "non-consumptive" nature of the bow seasons, it could have clearly applied everywhere without a conservation concern. But, the want guys to address the homesteader elk specifically...so they see it as a win-win. Can't really blame them. :)

I do wish it was everywhere too.

Would love to see some opportunity with the homesteader elk (3pt+ bulls or cows) for guys that only care about the quantity of elk meat in their freezer...like brotherjack. A 10 day 3pt and/or cow season in Zone X with rifles, immediately following the current bow only season, would probably do that. A couple years of that shouldn't hurt, then assess the population situation and go from there....adaptive management, man.

Cheers,
4Ster

[Fisher-Dude]

BCRams, I am going to guess that you did not hunt in the EK much from about '90 to '96. :) 6 pt bulls were a rare find. Hell, raghorns were tough hunting! A lot of guys remember that very well, and don't want to go back. I can't blame them.

And that's not "me, me, me" IMHO. How will re-creating the poor hunting of the mid-90's help with recruitment?? We have to be careful. Adhoc lifting of antler restrictions will not necessarily be the silver bullet...a couple years of very high success rates followed by a drought won't help any of us.

Cheers
4Ster.

BUT, the difference now is that we don't have DiMarchi's thousands of cow/calf permits either. And, we have fewer hunters. So, to assume that opening up seasons a bit will launch us right back into the poor hunting of the mid 90's (I know my group had much better elk success then than we do now) is erroneous.

Bayou, the study was based in region 8, but I'm afraid if I started to explain statistical sampling and confidence intervals and standard deviation, and how this study would apply to the province as a whole, and how the referenced studies in that report cover many other provinces and states and their similar problems, well, you'd have no basis for the argument you're trying to form. So I'll let you think you're correct in thinking that region 8 people are so different from region 4 people in the reasons they hunt. ;) I'll let others decide if the reason Joe in Vernon sold off his guns and his truck is the same reason Bill in Kimberly did likewise.

[horshur]

BCRams, I am going to guess that you did not hunt in the EK much from about '90 to '96. :) 6 pt bulls were a rare find. Hell, raghorns were tough hunting! A lot of guys remember that very well, and don't want to go back. I can't blame them.

And that's not "me, me, me" IMHO. How will re-creating the poor hunting of the mid-90's help with recruitment?? We have to be careful. Adhoc lifting of antler restrictions will not necessarily be the silver bullet...a couple years of very high success rates followed by a drought won't help any of us.

Cheers
4Ster.

Wait a minute...those poor numbers were because of very liberal calf seasons....people are not proposing that are they???
Too sound like a broken record....No body is denying that the 6 point system is good for herd numbers rather what is being said is that point restrictions are not good for hunter numbers........

[Kody94]

BUT, the difference now is that we don't have DiMarchi's thousands of cow/calf permits either. And, we have fewer hunters. So, to assume that opening up seasons a bit will launch us right back into the poor hunting of the mid 90's (I know my group had much better elk success then than we do now) is erroneous.

No, but we do have 50% of our elk staying on their winter range year-round, and causing the grief with ranchers, and cow/calf opportunities in place for archers/juniors and seniors to address that. To address that concern I think cows/calves need to be targetted....so that creates a pressure on the population that must be considered if contemplating removal of antler restrictions on bulls.

And don't forget that many of the backcountry areas that harboured lots of elk in the 80's, have still yet to fill back up!! Putting excessive pressure on bulls in these areas this soon will not help rectify that relic of DiMarchi's 'mis'management.

So, my point is that this needs to thought out carefully. There are opportunities to improve things for all of us...but first, lets stop blaming antler restrictions carte blanche for all our problems, recognize that they are still a valuable tool in our tool chest, and use our imaginations to find a balanced solution.

Cheers,
4Ster

[Kody94]

Wait a minute...those poor numbers were because of very liberal calf seasons....people are not proposing that are they???
Too sound like a broken record....No body is denying that the 6 point system is good for herd numbers rather what is being said is that point restrictions are not good for hunter numbers........

As I just mentioned above, those liberal calf season have created problems that have still not been fixed, despite the large number of animals we currently have.

And the while the liberal calf seasons did a number on the total population, before it crashed completely, finding bulls wasn't as easy as it is today, in my experience and humble opinion.

I am also saying that there is more wrong than just point restrictions, with regard to hunter numbers. Lets find solutions that balance everybody's interests and work on as many ways as we can to improve recruitment and retention (ie. not put all our eggs in the antler restriction basket, and not throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak).

JMHO,
4Ster

[KevinB]

Anyway, back to my opinion on the 6 pt season itself. I would prefer that the gov't managers take a more active approach to managing the game numbers, hunter opportunity, recruitment/retention strategies, etc. Having a 6pt season forever is not what we need. Mix it up a bit. I belive we do have enough bulls to allow some 3pt hunting without making much of dent in the overall population, or affecting others chances at mature bulls, or affecting rutting behaviour (again -- I still remember the mid 90's) and cow/calf ratios...so why not? Maybe we could try a 5pt and better season for a couple years instead?? Or maybe we put out a whack of 3 pt and better LEHs for specific MUs or parts thereof...so you'd have a good chance at one every year or two at the most. My point is that we over simplify....we can probably have our cake and eat it too if we use our imagination a bit.
4Ster

Well put 4Ster,

I think that part of the problem, is exactly that - game management in BC tends to be pretty slow and unresponsive. It seems that once a certain restriction is in place (which I for sure am completely for, if required for conservation, or even, if it would somehow help with recruitment and retention of hunters), it is like pulling teeth to get it removed, and they often needlessly stay in place once the conservation concern has lessened. I think the managers have their hands tied in a lot of cases, regulation/act changes can be painful to do - the sytem is not exactly set up to be very nimble. And we all know that there are a lot of other pressures on managers besides hunter needs, some of them carrying a lot of political weight. I think what the 3 pt. proponents are getting at is since the data shows that the population can sustain a more liberal season (I personally have no idea, never hunted elk or in the EK, but it sounds like that's what the data shows), there should be no great reason to continue with a restrictive season, especially since it appears to be one of the factors in declining hunter numbers/recruitment. Bring it in slowly if need be, to avoid a very sudden large increase in harvest and the "gong-show" factor, but bring it in.

that's my 2 cents. gotta get back to the rifle and get the wipe-out out of the bore...

[Fisher-Dude]

No, but we do have 50% of our elk staying on their winter range year-round, and causing the grief with ranchers, and cow/calf opportunities in place for archers/juniors and seniors to address that. To address that concern I think cows/calves need to be targetted....so that creates a pressure on the population that must be considered if contemplating removal of antler restrictions on bulls.

And don't forget that many of the backcountry areas that harboured lots of elk in the 80's, have still yet to fill back up!! Putting excessive pressure on bulls in these areas this soon will not help rectify that relic of DiMarchi's 'mis'management.

So, my point is that this needs to thought out carefully. There are opportunities to improve things for all of us...but first, lets stop blaming antler restrictions carte blanche for all our problems, recognize that they are still a valuable tool in our tool chest, and use our imaginations to find a balanced solution.

Cheers,
4Ster

Got any inventory data to back up your assertion that 50% of elk are homesteaders, and that areas haven't "filled up" in the backcountry yet? Also, do you have inventory data on the number of homesteader elk in the 80s vs now, and the number of 80s backcountry elk vs now? Or is it just speculation on your part based on observations in the areas you hunt? I'm a bit confused because people are saying they are glassing "hills full of elk" and are "wading through 5 points", yet you assert that the herds have not recovered???

Also, is it too simplistic to think that if we target some cows with bow/youth/senior seasons, that we can also stand a higher bull harvest that would result in the same healthy bull : cow ratios that we currently have? :wink:

[KevinB]

I am also saying that there is more wrong than just point restrictions, with regard to hunter numbers. Lets find solutions that balance everybody's interests and work on as many ways as we can to improve recruitment and retention (ie. not put all our eggs in the antler restriction basket, and not throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak).
4Ster

Again not to speak for anyone else, but I don't think that is the point that is being made...I think all the 3pt. proponents would agree with you, there are a whole host of problems, but it does sound like antler restrictions in general are one of the big "hunter killers". I think if restrictions of whatever type are needed from a conservation point of view, by all means they should be used, but if we don't need them then they aren't very helpful. We need to use as many different approaches as possible to increase hunter retention and recruitment, while above all still managing the animal population in a sustainable way. Don't get me wrong, I would still rather see antler restrictions on an otherwise open season, than LEH, but I think there might be better ways to manage harvest levels and still provide increased opportunity. Maybe a one bull in 2 years strategy? Other similar things? Or alternate between 6 point and 3 point seasons every other year??

[Kody94]

Got any inventory data to back up your assertion that 50% of elk are homesteaders, and that areas haven't "filled up" in the backcountry yet? Also, do you have inventory data on the number of homesteader elk in the 80s vs now, and the number of 80s backcountry elk vs now? Or is it just speculation on your part based on observations in the areas you hunt? I'm a bit confused because people are saying they are glassing "hills full of elk" and are "wading through 5 points", yet you assert that the herds have not recovered???

Also, is it too simplistic to think that if we target some cows with bow/youth/senior seasons, that we can also stand a higher bull harvest that would result in the same healthy bull : cow ratios that we currently have? :wink:

In fact I do have the interim results of a study that demonstrates that more than 50% of out elk are not leaving their winter range.

I only have "anecdotal" evidence and personal experience to back up my (and MANY others) claims that the populations in the backcountry have not fully recovered. But thats every bit as good as anyone's evidence to the contrary! And those that hunt the far backcountry (back of the Findlay, Dutch, White, etc) will undoubtedly back up my contention.

I see "hills full of elk" and have been up to my arse in raghorns, but not everywhere!! There are lots of places with TONNES of bulls, but they are mainly in the main valley, with some other isolated areas with high numbers. Again though, they ain't like that everywhere. Probably why some guys still find it hard to fill a tag. ;)

And I've already agreed we can stand a higher bull harvest. I am just saying we need to be more cautious and inventive than just scrapping the entire 6pt season across the entire EK in favor of a 3pt+ season.

Phasing it in over time might be doable...give some time to address the population distribution issues we have, while taking advantage of some enhanced bull hunting opportuntity in the short term. Then again it might not...but thats what adaptive management is all about.

Cheers
4Ster

[Kody94]

Again not to speak for anyone else, but I don't think that is the point that is being made...I think all the 3pt. proponents would agree with you, there are a whole host of problems, but it does sound like antler restrictions in general are one of the big "hunter killers". I think if restrictions of whatever type are needed from a conservation point of view, by all means they should be used, but if we don't need them then they aren't very helpful. We need to use as many different approaches as possible to increase hunter retention and recruitment, while above all still managing the animal population in a sustainable way. Don't get me wrong, I would still rather see antler restrictions on an otherwise open season, than LEH, but I think there might be better ways to manage harvest levels and still provide increased opportunity. Maybe a one bull in 2 years strategy? Other similar things? Or alternate between 6 point and 3 point seasons every other year??

I'm with ya. I am only saying a wholesale scrapping of antler restrictions because the sky is falling (recruitment/retention), isn't any better.

With specific regard to elk in the EK, I personally "think" (which is what we are all doing here without perfect information at our fingertips) its too soon to scrap the entire 6pt season...which is what I see a number of people ARE promoting.

I agree there are opportunities to continue to conserve/enhance elk numbers while allowing greater bull hunting opportunity, and I like that your thinking outside the box...thats just what I think we need. Not just for the managers, but us hunters....

Cheers,
4Ster

[J_T]

Wise words 4ster. Took you a while to get all that out.

I believe that as we look to the balance of interests and management opportunities, that cause and effect is the key. Yup, I'm not into stats, I'm a philosopher. As we work towards more liberal harvests for whatever the reason, we must manage the risk of change, that making decisions such as a 3pt bull harvest in EK is directly impacted by a move not to open up elk hunting in the WK.

GG, it isn't about me me me me. It is about meeting the needs of so many things and so many people. It's about doing something now, but recognizing it's a long ways from the field application to the decision in Victoria. It is critically important that everyone provide their perspective and their solution. You might see it as me me me, but you're missing the point.

I appreciate it when someone puts "their" stuff on the table for dissection. It makes it real and relavent. It makes it easier to understand the cause and effect.

[GoatGuy]

While I can see the fellows point, from his experience, it's certainly an unfair indictment, and not totally the case. Harvest numbers in Region 4 are high. There are practically as many 6pts being taken now their was 3+pt elk taken before the 6pt season started. And there are less hunters...ergo, success rates are up too! So as an individual hunter, your chance of taking a 6 pt today, are probably better than taking a 3pt was 10 years ago. And as a guy who was hunting here for far longer than that, I firmly believe the hunting is way better now than it ever was (can't speak about prior to the 80's though!).

Couple more questions to be answered but it's good you're thinking about it.

Your chances of taking a 6 pt have increased but what about the new hunter. Regulations is in part due to perception of success. Also the hunters who drop out are not what could be considered as knowledgeable/avid or what have you. The people who drop out are meat hunters - they don't hunt as much, have a tougher time finding legal game and aren't as hard on the resource as the 'good' hunters are.

They're generally guys who have been hunting a long time, looking for the first thing that's legal, have never shot a 6 pt and because of the season don't bother going hunting.


Those are the guys we kill off. By killing them we kill their kids off and we loose hunters from now on.

Trust me I have the stats :p





I know "Hunter Recruitment" is a big deal. We all have a significant stake in it. But we don't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater to get it. I have no reason to dispute the results of GoatGuy's study about hunter recruitment and retention in the OK, but I don't believe it captured the whole story. I firmly believe that our hunting culture, and our working culture as well, have changed so much that people are less inclined to take part and less inclined to stay. I think as a group we need to make more effort to bring people into the sport (hence my thread on hunting camps a little while back) and create an environment for them to stay. I think the social aspect of hunting is more important than success rates. But thats just MHO.

It's all tied in together. Opportunity or the perception thereof = hunters go afield as a group = social support. You'll find it in other jurisdictions where they've fought to maintain open seasons as opposed to lotteries.

In BC anytime there has been an antler/horn restriction put in place you'll kill off hunters. That's been shown in other states as well.

In BC we've killed off more of our hunter population than any other province or state that I've studied so either we're social misfits or there are other things at play. There are also jurisdictions have have increased or only seen slight decreases in hunters over the years. For the most part they're the same places that have fought to maintain shorter gos where everyone can access and hunt wildlife annually with a reasonable expectation of success.



I am going to bet that just as many proponents of opening the season up to 3 or better...for "conservation" or "recruitment/retention" reasons, are actually for it so they can fill their freezer, and really for no other reason than that. They don't like the fact they haven't been lucky, or haven't figured out how to kill 6pts (which is not too darn hard these days), and just care about themselves and their empty freezer. Woe is me.

It really should be about conservation. We're supposed to be conservationists. ;-)

I don't bother elk hunting - spent one day looking two years ago to burn some time before my hunting buddy could head out to look for sheep.

We get a moose every year. See plenty of elk in the EK don't carry a tag, don't need the meat, don't bother.

It isn't about me, it's about hunting.



"Me, me, me" is a problem, don't get me wrong, but it cuts both ways. There are a lot of pots calling kettles black around here.


A general open season is just that - everybody gets to hunt the way they want. So long as it's sustainable it should be as liberal as possible then you maximize participation and opportunity (perceived atleast and for hunters that sometimes counts more than reality).


Nice to see you're thinking about it anyways.

[GoatGuy]

We should have an idea of the population after the flights are done.


Anybody want to take a guess on numbers?

[Kody94]

Couple more questions to be answered but it's good you're thinking about it.

Your chances of taking a 6 pt have increased but what about the new hunter. Regulations is in part due to perception of success. Also the hunters who drop out are not what could be considered as knowledgeable/avid or what have you. The people who drop out are meat hunters - they don't hunt as much, have a tougher time finding legal game and aren't as hard on the resource as the 'good' hunters are.

They're generally guys who have been hunting a long time, looking for the first thing that's legal, have never shot a 6 pt and because of the season don't bother going hunting.

Those are the guys we kill off. By killing them we kill their kids off and we loose hunters from now on.

Trust me I have the stats


I don't disagree with any of that. I have agreed there are opportunities to improve the "perception" of success, as well as realized success. Again, I just caution about swinging the pendulum too far, too fast, because the sky is supposedly falling. If realized success rates are reasonable, and those of us that actively hunt, do our part to encourage others to come out and hunt (whether new, or guys that have stepped away from hunting over time) with us...success will happen and perceptions will not be out of line with reality.

And don't forget, I said my chance of taking a 6pt is as good (or better) than taking ANY bull 10 years ago. I flogged a lot of country back in those days looking for any 3pt or better. Took me years to get my first bull. I'd rather have taken up the sport we have today....getting bulls bugling every single day and having close encounters with bulls, whether legal or not, does as much to keep me coming back as just shooting one. My "perception" of eventual success is much greater with that much elk activity now, than it was in the early 90's when getting any action was a rarity. But I realize that's just me....everyone's mileage will vary. :)



It's all tied in together. Opportunity or the perception thereof = hunters go afield as a group = social support. You'll find it in other jurisdictions where they've fought to maintain open seasons as opposed to lotteries.

In BC anytime there has been an antler/horn restriction put in place you'll kill off hunters. That's been shown in other states as well.

In BC we've killed off more of our hunter population than any other province or state that I've studied so either we're social misfits or there are other things at play. There are also jurisdictions have have increased or only seen slight decreases in hunters over the years. For the most part they're the same places that have fought to maintain shorter gos where everyone can access and hunt wildlife annually with a reasonable expectation of success.

I don't disagree with that either....but it doesn't prove to me that managing with antler restrictions is a always a bad thing. I truly believe that one can provide a wide range of opportunities and satisfy many interests, while adequately conserving wildlife resources and recruiting/retaining membership in our "sport". Carte blanche dismissal of antler restrictions is very closed-minded IMHO.




It really should be about conservation. We're supposed to be conservationists. ;-)

I don't bother elk hunting - spent one day looking two years ago to burn some time before my hunting buddy could head out to look for sheep.

We get a moose every year. See plenty of elk in the EK don't carry a tag, don't need the meat, don't bother.

It isn't about me, it's about hunting.

I agree. Conservation first. Find ways to have your cake and eat it too, by providing opportunities to accomadate as many interests as you can.

I am just a hunter. I was raised a meat hunter. Sometimes I am a trophy hunter, sometimes I am a selective hunter, and often times I just shoot for the pot when the first legal animal comes along. I hunt with rifles, shotguns, blackpowder, I hunt with recurve bows, compound bows, even x-bows..heck, I hunt with slingshots....I'll hunt with anything. I just hunt.

My opinion ain't about me either. My day job is all about balancing competing interests, "considering all things", protecting public and private interests concurrently.... My personality profile characterizes me as an "Amiable"....I try to keep everyone happy. While I may be a "Johnny-Come-Lately" on this website, trust that I am far from new at this. :)

I am just passing on what I see, and how I feel. Today...



A general open season is just that - everybody gets to hunt the way they want. So long as it's sustainable it should be as liberal as possible then you maximize participation and opportunity (perceived atleast and for hunters that sometimes counts more than reality).

General open seasons are great, although I have no problem whatsoever providing specific additional opportunities where conservation allows. No-one is restricted from participating in any season...and as long as the general opportunities for all are "maximized", its all positive IMHO. "Liberal as possible" may just depend on the information at hand and one's willingness to accept risk, but in theory I don't disagree with you.


Nice to see you're thinking about it anyways.

I think about it all the time. I speak up when I can find the time. :)

Cheers
4Ster

[hunter1947]

We should have an idea of the population after the flights are done.


Anybody want to take a guess on numbers?
I would say that the elk population in the EK is around 22000 strong.

[hunter1947]

Not a problem Fisher-Dude and those of you who want a 3 point season opened, make sure you only shoot 3 points:biggrin:
I have always shot the first animal that was legal and I'm not going to change my ways if they do open a 3 point season this year.

[hunter1947]

Not necessarily sfire436....

Late in teh season last year I did the superstalk on a herd and had 2 bulls scrapping in front of me at about 50 yards.....One had a big rack, the other had a small one......Assumed (stupid me) that the larger bull was a 6 and the other was a 5.....

Small one left with the herd and the larger laid down and had a rest....He was a very solid 5, but had a very small split on top that was so close to being a 6th.....I could not be sure so let him walk away.....

Hustled and stalked in on the herd with the smaller bull....5pt.....But in much better physical shape, the first bull had huge chunks of hair missing and was dragging his feet with fatigue.....

I think what had happened is the younger bull kicked the others arse and took over his harem, as the old guy was tired.....I think this changing of the guard happens on a regular basis all season long....The satellites rest up and get enough energy to overthrow the king and then a few days later, another change occurs....

I have seen large 3 points running a harem and the satellite bull being a 5....Might be just for a day or 2, but body size and health has more to do with who is the master, than the number of points.... You are right on the money rock ,I coulden have said it any better.
http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon12.gif.

[hunter1947]

Hunting should be an "experience" not just a meat run. Most guys won't argue that putting one in the freezer just adds to the experience but by reading alot of these comments it seems that it may be more important to kill than to just come out and hunt elk for a week or two.

I should say, I live in the EK, so take these comments as you wish, but the 6 pt season saved the elk going on LEH and to us, that is music to our ears. I am not going to get into a pissing match about out of region vs local hunters, but what people have to realize is that what the 6 pt season has done is created a vastly increased hunting "EXPERIENCE". We can go out any given day and see elk. Simple, seeing these buggers in every draw and ridge is an amazing experience. I love having to stop, pull out the scope and size up a bull, it is exciting and you never know when that 6th pt is going to show up. AND THEY DO.

My Point: If you go to a 3pt season, it will be like back when I was a kid, the elk will go nocturnal, and you might go all day and see a couple cows in the morning and maybe a small shy bull. I remember those days, and they were terrible. The same guys who moaned when the 6pt restriction was put in place are the SAME guys who will fight to protect it now, because of what it has done for elk HUNTING, not killing.

you think you have to hunt hard to get a elk now???!!! wait till you see what it would be like a few years into a 3pt season. Nocturnal Elk. You'll wonder what the hell happened in these areas. One hour of hunting in the morning and at dusk and 8 hours of playing cards in the wall tent. good times. Recruitment would drop like a bag of sand if these young guys and gals aren't seeing and hunting elk while they are out. You watch.

I, for one, would like to hunt and see elk every day, it makes that 6pt bull all that much sweeter when things come together.

and oh yeah, I haven't cut a tag myself on an elk since 2003 and couldn't be happier with all the trips since.
That's why we have management ,there as-pose to do the managing ,not the hunters.

[Fisher-Dude]

We should have an idea of the population after the flights are done.


Anybody want to take a guess on numbers?

28,000 elk in the Trench. DiMarchi thought 23,000 was too many and aimed to hit 16,000 with his "policies". I can't wait to see the numbers! :-D

[Fisher-Dude]

And don't forget, I said my chance of taking a 6pt is as good (or better) than taking ANY bull 10 years ago. I flogged a lot of country back in those days looking for any 3pt or better. Took me years to get my first bull. I'd rather have taken up the sport we have today....getting bulls bugling every single day and having close encounters with bulls, whether legal or not, does as much to keep me coming back as just shooting one. My "perception" of eventual success is much greater with that much elk activity now, than it was in the early 90's when getting any action was a rarity. But I realize that's just me....everyone's mileage will vary. :)

4Ster

My experience with success (and the group I hunt with) has been the opposite, as we had a much better success rate with the 3 or better seasons. I too get the thrill of my trip with bugling bulls and crashing branches and thundering hooves in close - I know exactly what you're saying. BUT, it's not about what floats MY boat, it's about getting folks out there hunting, and all the studies point to steaks in the freezer as being the #1 motivator. We need to get those casual meat hunters GG speaks about back out there with tags in their pockets, and their kids along with them. That will definitely help our numbers.

Generation Y kids want immediate gratification, and that's what they will need to get them hooked on our sport. Fur on the ground is what it will take, and we can hope to develop their love of thundering hooves once we turn them into lifers with punched tags.

[wetcoasthunter]

When you say status quo, what about the jr./sr. opportunities? Is this season not an attempt (albeit maybe not the best approach) to provide more opportunities and encourage recruitment, especially in providing newer (i.e. younger) hunters with success.


Problem is with these jr/sr seasons is they cater to jr/sr only, which is not a bad thing, but there are alot of years between these 2 groups that are being neglected. It just isn't enough, they have to go alot further if we want to see increased hunter retention and recruitment. My 2 cents.

[KevinB]

Problem is with these jr/sr seasons is they cater to jr/sr only, which is not a bad thing, but there are alot of years between these 2 groups that are being neglected. It just isn't enough, they have to go alot further if we want to see increased hunter retention and recruitment. My 2 cents.

Yup, I have a couple of new hunters I'm taking out this year (one got his first buck on his first day last year). The GOS for deer around here is only a month, which is okay for those of us who don't have much problem finding deer, but it isn't that long for a newbie. How about opening up a much longer GOS for deer (or whatever) for new hunters - say, 3 years with a hunter number or less, and they get a 2 or 3 month GOS? The odds are that both of these guys would get at least one buck in that time, without having to spend a lot of time out there (they both have a lot of other avid outdoor interests to compete with). They are happy, with meat in the freezer, and odds are they might then be hooked, or at least hooked enough to buy a license and a couple of tags from then on and actually get out there a few times a year.

[rocksteady]

This should probably stir the pot a little bit.....

WHY IS THERE SO MANY ELK IN THE LOWLANDS ?????????

Because of the ongoing conflicts of range management...

I have seen cattle up in the Bull River Drainage at the end of November.
I have seen other "winter range" that has been moved so low by cattle that there is not enough forage to sustain a herd of gophers, much less elk..
I have seen the ranchers put up huge elk fences (which they are subsidized by our tax dollars to do) to protect their crops, whereas their cattle are grazing on crown forage, where the elk do not have "cattle fences" to keep out cows.
I have seen extremely heated public meeting debates where a rancher and a guide/outfitter told each other to step outside to settle the debate the old fashioned way.
I have seen forage enhancement burns cancelled beacuse the elk have no other feed, so they remove what they can to survive, elimating the ground fuels necessary to carry a enhancement burn.
I have seen ranchers go as high up the political ladder as they can, and WIN, because they were told that they had to rest a crown pasture for a summer, to try to ready the site for an enhancement burn.
I have seen the ranching community (by and large) who want to promote "support the local economy" purchase all of their large equipment purchases in Pincher Creek, Alberta in order to avoid paying PST.


These are all observations that I believe are at the root of the conflict for the elk to be hanging out in the lowlands (below 1100m) and causing the ranching community to be putting pressure on the MOE to impliment massive antlerless tags (90's), private LEH lands, and now the Jr./Sr. season....

I have no problem with MOE saying we are going to the jr./sr. season because there are too many elk effecting the ranching community....Don't hide behind the smoke and mirrors of recruitment/retention...

[bighornbob]

We all have to remember that is was not the 3 point season that killed off the elk is was the years of cow/calf tags. I have copies of LEH regs going back to the so called glory days. MU 4-22 had 1200 calf tags given out and this was only one unit and this was for a number of years. Add a couple hundred cow tags and a 3 point or better season for 1.5 month plus a few bad winters and you have no elk heard left.

The bull season did not kill off the elk, but the almost unlimited amount of anterless tags did.

BHB

[TRACKnTRAIL]

I totally agree with you Rocksteady, It seems many ranchers believe grazing is a right not a privilege. The rules need to be enforced to get the cattle out on time and leaving enough food for the wildlife. If that means not grazing for as long, so be it.

[budismyhorse]

This discussion is great, I never get opportunity to discuss this with so many different proponents. cheers to all who are speaking up.

Not to keep beating the subject of the old boys not hunting anymore but I'll offer an experience and you say what you want about it.

For 5 years, 2 older fellas (60+) have hunted with us in the back country with horses, they shot elk the first trip but haven't for 4 years since, this season (2007) they decided to hang back and try and get a cow in the lowlands. Well, we happened to have a great year in our area, took one nice 6 and my old man missed another. While those older guys who stayed back pounded the bush from the quad and trucks and suck-holed to finally shoot one cow. End of the trip, they could barely talk to eachother they were so pissed about the whole deal. The hunt was tough and they could not believe how the elk changed within a day or two of the start of the hunt. Needless to say, they couldn't wait to tell us they will be back in the hills with us hunting 6pts next year. They said it was the most stressfull and unenjoyable hunting in their 50 years experience. Guys everwhere, no elk......

Other older guys I know: their kids grew up and moved off and they can't justify shooting a large animal for meat since they wouldn't use it all, so they just don't hunt anymore.

I think I am with SSSTer, I think the key may be to offer a limited immature bull season, maybe the last 10 days or 2 weeks, 3pts or better. Would that be the ticket to balance??

Thanks for the link of the Zeman report, I'll read it for sure, and bring my grains of salt.

[budismyhorse]

We all have to remember that is was not the 3 point season that killed off the elk is was the years of cow/calf tags. I have copies of LEH regs going back to the so called glory days. MU 4-22 had 1200 calf tags given out and this was only one unit and this was for a number of years. Add a couple hundred cow tags and a 3 point or better season for 1.5 month plus a few bad winters and you have no elk heard left.

The bull season did not kill off the elk, but the almost unlimited amount of anterless tags did.

BHB


Combination of the three, no?? You stated three things, then singled out the main one, but they all were factors. The years when all the cows got pounded, where when early, HEAVY snow hit, which turned out to be bad winters.....if the snow didn't hit early the cows were less slaughtered, so the lmmature bull season was a considerable factor in those years.

I think it was ridiculous aggressive management and we shouldn't fall down that slippery slope again. Scale back slowly and see how things pan out. I am jumping across the table and in favour of a LIMITED 3pt season. Last 2 weeks. Not in the rut, no way, not ever.

[bighornbob]

The years when all the cows got pounded, where when early, HEAVY snow hit, which turned out to be bad winters.....


The early snow pushing the elk did not really matter to the slaughter. My uncle and his friends (all locals) hammered the elk every year with less then an inch of snow on the ground. They would hunt Bulls all season holding out for the big boys (Sept 10 to Oct 31 or something). Once the season would close there was still a month of LEH anterless draws. My uncle would take a week or two off of hunting elk and wait for the first tracking snow. Once there was a bit of tracking snow he would just drive around until he saw a bunch of tracks heading into the timber and follow them in and shoot whatever his LEH was for.

I remember always having two LEHs between the 3 of us as the odds were always around 1:1.5 or something. In the bull river there were hundreds of camps withs hundreds of anterless elk hanging on meat poles. Like many have said the majority of hunters are meat hunters.

Add a few bad winters to the slaughter of the anterless and your propulation crashes. If there was only a 3 point season even with the bad winters there would not have been a problem.

BHB

[horshur]

Generation Y kids want immediate gratification, and that's what they will need to get them hooked on our sport. Fur on the ground is what it will take, and we can hope to develop their love of thundering hooves once we turn them into lifers with punched tags.

No. This is exactly what should not be done.

Please don't be offended but that is kinda like saying if we get them into sex early they will have strong enduring marriages. There is a lot of proof to the contrary.

We should not pander to this "Instant Gratification" bullshit at all. It will not be enduring just like so many marriages today anyway.

Hunting is Cultural and Instant Gratification is "Anti Culture" for it will never hold up it's role required to pass the traditions because it only thinks of itself at that moment.

We would not be discussing this if past generations were not prone to this human flaw to begin with.Instant gratification is a poor foundation for culture and tradition.

[budismyhorse]

I think the same way Horshur,

I honestly believe that instant gratification will be the death of this sport. If a young hunter goes out and shoots a small bull each year, that will NOT foster a long term love for hunting. It will be too easy and they will just look to the next fix for ADD. They can shoot any whitetail buck they see anyhow.

Actually the more I think about it, if all the hunters, young and old, rookie or experienced, that just want meat are out to shoot a 3pt, they will likely stay out of the back country (no need to go) and that will mean better elk hunting for me, so selfishly, I want this thing to go through. If all the meat hunters are fighting down low, the high country will be quiet.....

Instant Gratification will breed laziness.

Give them something to work towards and when they wear out some leather and lose a few pounds doing so, suddenly they can't wait to do it all again. I know , I know, IF they shoot something....that is where the balance comes in. Limited 3pt season, best of both worlds.

[Fisher-Dude]

Well guys, as much as the utopian world of motivated, hard-working kids would be great, it is, unfortunately, NOT going to happen with these kids. I'd like to see them with the same ethics as we have, but it ain't gonna happen.

I hire these kids continually into good paying, union jobs, and manage to retain about 15 - 20% of them if I'm lucky. Some start and walk up to the foreman after a couple of hours and say "Nah, this is no fun" and walk out the door. In our day, to get such a job would have been too good to be true for our generation. That's all changed.

As much as we'd like our kids to be like us, they aren't, and will not be, so trying to design a season/opportunity based on outdated beliefs will doom it to failure for recruitment. I've taken lots of courses with career recruitment professionals and psychologists trying to understand what makes these Gen Yers tick so that we can improve our workplace/hiring practices to keep more of them onboard, and the theme always comes back to what they expect: immediate gratification, immediate results, and if it "sucks", they move on to the next thing without looking back. We've raised this group of spoiled brats:roll:, so that's what we have to work with.

We need to design our opportunities to meet their success expectations first and foremost, and try to foster that deeper love of the experience as our recruits mature. By no means am I a proponent of introducing hunters to the sport without instilling ethics in them, but I do realize that we must structure opportunities to trigger those gratification desires first.

[budismyhorse]

Fisher, great post! Thanks for the background into your situation.

Just the one question then.. FROM A RECRUITMENT STANDPOINT, with youth seasons already in place and basically slam-dunk whitetail deer in the Kootenays, why do we need a dangerously aggressive Elk Season for everyone else??? Just to keep the meat hunters 36-50yrs old happy? that is fine, but even for them an elk between 2 guys is just fine and those opportunities exist without going to a blanket 3pt system.

[Fisher-Dude]

Fisher, great post! Thanks for the background into your situation.

Just the one question then.. FROM A RECRUITMENT STANDPOINT, with youth seasons already in place and basically slam-dunk whitetail deer in the Kootenays, why do we need a dangerously aggressive Elk Season for everyone else??? Just to keep the meat hunters 36-50yrs old happy? that is fine, but even for them an elk between 2 guys is just fine and those opportunities exist without going to a blanket 3pt system.

Dangerously aggressive? Where do you get that from? The game managers have already said the herd can sustain a harvest at 3 point or better with NO conservation concern. It's only the local opposition that has quashed it. The proposal would NOT have been floated by the MoE if there were ANY conservation concerns. The science is there - the politics have over ruled it. It's important that you understand that point!

An elk between 2 guys would indicate a 50% success rate amongst hunters, and I don't think (GG has the stats) that this high a success rate has ever been achieved by EK elk hunters. What makes you think it would be more or 100%?

Keeping those 36 - 50 year old guys hunting is extremely important for two reasons. Firstly, it RETAINS current meat hunters that have/will give up with antler restricted seasons. Secondly, those guys have teenaged kids that we NEED RECRUITED into hunting. From the Zeman study, 55% of new hunters were recruited by their fathers. That's so important to the future of hunting! If dad isn't going hunting, junior will not be going either!

Meat hunters have 2 primary quarry: elk and moose. When feeding a family, these large ungulates are by far the first choices of the meat hunter, both for size and for table fare. When the economics of going hunting to the E Kootenay is considered, a 95 lb whitetail will NOT cut it compared to a 400 lb elk - it costs basically as much to travel/take time from work/camp/buy equipment to kill a deer as it does to kill an elk.

[budismyhorse]

right on, another good post,

ya see, this is why I am into this. Great information. thanks!

Dangerously aggressive is a bit of an exaggeration, I'll take that back. I am writing this at work and don't really have the time to craft the most perfect reply I can.

But I am with you. If you think that a liberal elk season in the east kootenay will be the solution to a steady decline in hunter number since 1981, I am all for it. I am starting to be convinced, but still skeptical that the resulting hunting wouldn't be worse for the sport....I still think it should be a limited season if it goes.

I think my point that you are continually missing, is that I don't think hunting opportunities would be better under a 3pt season, I think they would result in worse opportunity and even less hunter success. Which would result in less recruitment and problems with hunter retention. But that just my opinion.

cheers

[wetcoasthunter]

Just to keep the meat hunters 36-50yrs old happy?

Isn't it 20-64? I'm 28 and I am not exactly looking forward to waiting 40 yrs for my oppertunities to increase.

[Gateholio]

F_D is sure rigth abotu kids these days..A.D.D. is the norm, not the exception. I work with 18-25 yr olds all the time, and they bop around from one thing to another liek crazy.

As soon as a new model Ipod or cellphone comes out they NEED it...

I dont' own an Ipod and I use my cellphone for talking on the phone with, not taking pictures, playing games, texting my friends constantly etc. And I dont' download a new ring tone every other week.:tongue:

[todbartell]

F_D is sure rigth abotu kids these days..A.D.D. is the norm, not the exception. I work with 18-25 yr olds all the time, and they bop around from one thing to another liek crazy.

you also date one :lol:

[bighornbob]

I think my point that you are continually missing, is that I don't think hunting opportunities would be better under a 3pt season, I think they would result in worse opportunity and even less hunter success.


Care to explain this one a bit better?

Under a 3 point or greater season a person could shoot a 3 ,4, 5 or 6+ point bull as oppposed to just 6 points or better under the current system. The 3 points or better season would probably double if not triple the number of available bulls to be shot resulting in a greater oppurtunity.

Look at it another way (hypotheticly). You and nine friends want to hunt moose and its LEH. Zone A only gives out 2 tags while Zone B gives out 6 tags. Where would you apply for the best oppurtunity??? Using this scenario Zone A is the current 6 point or better elk hunt and Zone B would be the 3 point or better season.

BHB

[DWH]

I am having a hard time seeing how a 3pt season is guaranteed to improve hunter recruitment. Here's my 2 cents:

I understand the fact that the younger generation needs instant gratification, but hey, catering to this attitude will only succeed in furthering this behaviour. Should we encourage this type of behaviour just to get a bunch of lazy hunters to boost overall numbers? What effect will a bunch of hunters from this generation have in the future? Continued expectations of changing the regs so hunting is easier? I don't get why anyone would encourage this.

It even seems like the limited success of current hunters is the root of the desire to change the antler restrictions (i.e. merely give current hunters better odds of a successful hunt). I can't help but see through some people's claim that this direction is solely for recruitment and retention. Reading through some of these posts and it is strikingly apparent.

I am in support of the 6pt season because the opportunities out there are still very abundant. However, it is important for me to say to this statement that I am not against an amendment to antler restrictions provided it is through sound, management-oriented direction with long-term, sustainable considerations as a priority. Not just for padding hunter numbers but for the resource too.

Why are there less hunters? I would say society in general. We work more, earn less, save less, spend more, are in debt more and have less free time. The typical rat-race atittude is prevalent everyday. Maybe this is to blame rather than the 'immediate gratification generation', or 'it's tougher to hunt' or 'the damn mis-managed government' or the plethora of other reasons floating around out there. You want recruitment, do what others (including myself) have done, take someone out hunting. And take them to the EK's, put some effort into it, enjoy it and plan to do it again.

[Fisher-Dude]

you also date one :lol:

*****! :biggrin:

[budismyhorse]

Care to explain this one a bit better?

Under a 3 point or greater season a person could shoot a 3 ,4, 5 or 6+ point bull as oppposed to just 6 points or better under the current system. The 3 points or better season would probably double if not triple the number of available bulls to be shot resulting in a greater oppurtunity.

Look at it another way (hypotheticly). You and nine friends want to hunt moose and its LEH. Zone A only gives out 2 tags while Zone B gives out 6 tags. Where would you apply for the best oppurtunity??? Using this scenario Zone A is the current 6 point or better elk hunt and Zone B would be the 3 point or better season.

BHB

BHB, what I didn't put in the statement was the ending......in the future, or down the line.

to explain I think, and have stated previously (but was continually slammed) that the 3pt season would be too aggressive and result in too many elk being killed or shot up (nocturnal elk syndrome) and thus, the hunting would suffer. people would be forced to hunt fewer elk and those surviving bulls would be way more cagey and tougher to kill, especially for rookies.

I think, in a few short years, a huge amount of bulls would be taken, then less and less each year. Especially with the wonder stats that say we are 90% meat hunters. That means that, under an open 3pt season, this large herd of now stupid elk would be subject to slaughter, and, the majority of us being opportunistic meat hunters, would pound them into submission and the end result (not immediate result) would be poor elk hunting, low success and sh#tty elk hunting in the EK:icon_frow. We already have high predator numbers, all we would need is a liberal 3pt season, a harsh winter, and we are back to square one. We need to be conservative about this!

A limited season, on the other hand, would be the best of both worlds. I agree that we can't support a 6pt season infinitely (I understand this clearly now) but I personally don't think we can support a full on 3pt season either........

come on, I've moved into the middle, any takers??

cheers BHB, I enjoy reading your posts.

[budismyhorse]

DWH.....provided it is through sound, management-oriented direction with long-term, sustainable considerations as a priority. Not just for padding hunter numbers but for the resource too.



amen DWH

[bighornbob]

There wasn't a problem with elk hunting in the early 80's before all the anterless seasons were instituted with a 3 point or better season why would there be one now???

BHB


BHB, what I didn't put in the statement was the ending......in the future, or down the line.

to explain I think, and have stated previously (but was continually slammed) that the 3pt season would be too aggressive and result in too many elk being killed or shot up (nocturnal elk syndrome) and thus, the hunting would suffer. people would be forced to hunt fewer elk and those surviving bulls would be way more cagey and tougher to kill, especially for rookies.

I think, in a few short years, a huge amount of bulls would be taken, then less and less each year. Especially with the wonder stats that say we are 90% meat hunters. That means that, under an open 3pt season, this large herd of now stupid elk would be subject to slaughter, and, the majority of us being opportunistic meat hunters, would pound them into submission and the end result (not immediate result) would be poor elk hunting, low success and sh#tty elk hunting in the EK:icon_frow. We already have high predator numbers, all we would need is a liberal 3pt season, a harsh winter, and we are back to square one. We need to be conservative about this!

A limited season, on the other hand, would be the best of both worlds. I agree that we can't support a 6pt season infinitely (I understand this clearly now) but I personally don't think we can support a full on 3pt season either........

come on, I've moved into the middle, any takers??

cheers BHB, I enjoy reading your posts.

[GoatGuy]

So is the problem

1) Moving to a 3pt or better season isn't sustainable?

2) Moving to a 3pt isn't good for recruitment and retention?

[Fisher-Dude]

I am having a hard time seeing how a 3pt season is guaranteed to improve hunter recruitment. Here's my 2 cents:

I understand the fact that the younger generation needs instant gratification, but hey, catering to this attitude will only succeed in furthering this behaviour. Should we encourage this type of behaviour just to get a bunch of lazy hunters to boost overall numbers? What effect will a bunch of hunters from this generation have in the future? Continued expectations of changing the regs so hunting is easier? I don't get why anyone would encourage this.

It even seems like the limited success of current hunters is the root of the desire to change the antler restrictions (i.e. merely give current hunters better odds of a successful hunt). I can't help but see through some people's claim that this direction is solely for recruitment and retention. Reading through some of these posts and it is strikingly apparent.

I am in support of the 6pt season because the opportunities out there are still very abundant. However, it is important for me to say to this statement that I am not against an amendment to antler restrictions provided it is through sound, management-oriented direction with long-term, sustainable considerations as a priority. Not just for padding hunter numbers but for the resource too.

Why are there less hunters? I would say society in general. We work more, earn less, save less, spend more, are in debt more and have less free time. The typical rat-race atittude is prevalent everyday. Maybe this is to blame rather than the 'immediate gratification generation', or 'it's tougher to hunt' or 'the damn mis-managed government' or the plethora of other reasons floating around out there. You want recruitment, do what others (including myself) have done, take someone out hunting. And take them to the EK's, put some effort into it, enjoy it and plan to do it again.

Did you read the Zeman study? And do you have any education in the psychology of the group whom we are attempting to recruit?

No one is trying to make hunting "easy". What we are trying to do is make opportunities so that people take an interest in the sport. If this were all about ME, and you seem to think that I or other proponents of the 3 point season are in it for ourselves, I would not be a director in my local club trying to create opportunities for other hunters and fishers. I do really well hunting and fishing within the current regs. I'd be fighting to keep it that way if it were all about ME, just like some who don't want OTHERS shooting "their" game or catching "their" fish. Instead, I'm looking to create opportunities for OTHERS so that they can get into the sports.

Goat Guy and I have spearheaded several new hunting and fishing proposals in region 8 that are now on the table for MoE discussion and consideration. These proposals are aimed directly at youth and families, not at GG or myself. GG and I stand to gain only the future of our sport from this by helping to keep hunting/fishing AVAILABLE in BC. I get a bit tired of having those who volunteer countless hours of their time being accused of being in it for themselves. :mad: Just ask a guy like JT or 6616 how much time they devote to their respective clubs/organizations to promote our sport.

Do you not understand what has been repeated over and over here - if we fail to get the numbers of hunters on the upswing in this province, NONE of us will be hunting in a few years. THAT is the grim reality.

IF there is no conservation concern, wildlife is to be managed for hunting opportunity.

And, don't forget that if we fail to harvest our resident quotas of some species of animals, those will be re-allocated to non-residents for their harvest under the new allocation policy. Do you want to lose YOUR hunting opportunities to some rich yankee hunter?

[Fisher-Dude]

Where are all these "stupid elk" that are just standing around waiting to be slaughtered?:roll:

[budismyhorse]

vastly increased access to country, technology (better calls, cow calls and bugles instead of hollow copper tubing, better camo, scentloc, ect), cells phones (don't get me started about the use of these in elk hunting, hand held radios, access, groups of guys setting up on draws with ear peices and guys with radios on the other side of the valley, better guns, better bullet technology, vastly increased access.......

the game has changed since 1980 and I personally think you can't equate today with the conditions of yesteryear.

it isn't a fair comparison. Access alone.

Like I said we need to treat it in a conservative manner.

Finally, a question for YOU, do you really think that in todays hunting, the Ek elk hunting can sustain a general 3pt or better season and not have significantly negative results down the line?

[Fisher-Dude]

Finally, a question for YOU, do you really think that in todays hunting, the Ek elk hunting can sustain a general 3pt or better season and not have significantly negative results down the line?

Absolutely. So do the regional biologists.

Have you seen the original study that was used to implement the 6 point season/no cow or calf harvest recovery plan in 1997? It was implicite in stating that over the longer term, a 6 point season will be detrimental to the health of the herd.

[budismyhorse]

Where are all these "stupid elk" that are just standing around waiting to be slaughtered?:roll:

How can you even say something like that. That is what started this whole thing. Hunters frustrated by wading through the 5pts.......those 5pts are the stupid elk.....

I don't think you could find an east kootenay elk hunter that would say there wouldn't be a mass slaughter if there was an open 3pt season next year.

if you don't know that, why am I even talking to you about this.

[budismyhorse]

Absolutely. So do the regional biologists.

Have you seen the original study that was used to implement the 6 point season/no cow or calf harvest recovery plan in 1997? It was implicite in stating that over the longer term, a 6 point season will be detrimental to the health of the herd.

The same people that are being mauled by the Ranchers to do something about all these elk......

You know what, I am a biologist, and I understand the reports and stats and have read your stuff, I just prefer to act conservatively.

and I am not in favour of a 6pt season infinitely, I would like to see a limited 3pt season implemented as well.

[Fisher-Dude]

How can you even say something like that. That is what started this whole thing. Hunters frustrated by wading through the 5pts.......those 5pts are the stupid elk.....

I don't think you could find an east kootenay elk hunter that would say there wouldn't be a mass slaughter if there was an open 3pt season next year.

if you don't know that, why am I even talking to you about this.

Okay, let's counter with:



My Point: If you go to a 3pt season, it will be like back when I was a kid, the elk will go nocturnal, and you might go all day and see a couple cows in the morning and maybe a small shy bull. I remember those days, and they were terrible. The same guys who moaned when the 6pt restriction was put in place are the SAME guys who will fight to protect it now, because of what it has done for elk HUNTING, not killing.

you think you have to hunt hard to get a elk now???!!! wait till you see what it would be like a few years into a 3pt season. Nocturnal Elk. You'll wonder what the hell happened in these areas. One hour of hunting in the morning and at dusk and 8 hours of playing cards in the wall tent. good times. Recruitment would drop like a bag of sand if these young guys and gals aren't seeing and hunting elk while they are out. You watch.


So, on the one hand, all these elk would be stupid and stand around and be slaughtered. Yet on the other hand, they will go nocturnal and we won't even get any.

Which one is it?

[wetcoasthunter]

From what I can tell, the regs before 1997 had sustained the population for decades, with more hunters in the bush. So now that the herd has recovered from the winters/bad management/etc how can one say that this would deteriorate the hunting experience? With way less hunters and just as many animals, logic states that it will work, and for the long term. I am sorry to those that continue to support a 6pt season (and I do respect your opion) but in this I just cannot see how your reasoning works, doesn't make sense to me.

The problem with this is people are scared (mainly locals I think) that "their" hunting area, if the season regs are relaxed, will get "over run" with people looking for better odds. What needs to happen is a province wide look at what populations can sustain a, for example, 3pt or better season. Which, by the sounds of it many areas in the province can, not just the east kootenays. If a population can sustain such a season, make it happen (and not one of these 7 day things, I'm talking weeks), enough of this protecting ones back yard from the evil outsiders BS. Open up MANY areas, not just 1 or 2, spread out the hunters over many areas and many days. If its not an issue of conservation then it shouldn't be an issue.

[budismyhorse]

Okay, let's counter with:



So, on the one hand, all these elk would be stupid and stand around and be slaughtered. Yet on the other hand, they will go nocturnal and we won't even get any.

Which one is it?


Fisher, it is both! First the slaughter, then the tougher hunting. It isn't going to happen in the same season, it will happen down the line....like I stated previously.

Do you hunt out here by the way? not trying to be a jerk, I am just curious as how you are having trouble with that notion.

[budismyhorse]

From what I can tell, the regs before 1997 had sustained the population for decades, with more hunters in the bush. So now that the herd has recovered from the winters/bad management/etc how can one say that this would deteriorate the hunting experience? With way less hunters and just as many animals, logic states that it will work, and for the long term. I am sorry to those that continue to support a 6pt season (and I do respect your opion) but in this I just cannot see how your reasoning works, doesn't make sense to me.

The problem with this is people are scared (mainly locals I think) that "their" hunting area, if the season regs are relaxed, will get "over run" with people looking for better odds. What needs to happen is a province wide look at what populations can sustain a, for example, 3pt or better season. Which, by the sounds of it many areas in the province can, not just the east kootenays. If a population can sustain such a season, make it happen (and not one of these 7 day things, I'm talking weeks), enough of this protecting ones back yard from the evil outsiders BS. Open up MANY areas, not just 1 or 2, spread out the hunters over many areas and many days. If its not an issue of conservation then it shouldn't be an issue.


Good take on it,

And you know what, that might be the way to go.....

[Fisher-Dude]

Fisher, it is both! First the slaughter, then the tougher hunting. It isn't going to happen in the same season, it will happen down the line....like I stated previously.

Do you hunt out here by the way? not trying to be a jerk, I am just curious as how you are having trouble with that notion.

I started hunting the EK for elk in 1978. My dad started in 1953ish. I go for 2 weeks every year if I can. Maybe missed 5 or 6 years since 1978 due to work or studies. I have family in Sparwood.

I was there with twice the hunters and a fully sustainable 3 point bull elk season. It was better for everyone at that time, the elk included, as they weren't splattered all over the sides of highway 3 with Kenworth imprints in their flanks. Those elk we hunted in the 70s 80s and 90s with twice the hunters weren't stupid, weren't nocturnal, and were all over the place, just like they are now. Over-extension of the cow/calf LEH and a wicked winter knocked the elk numbers down, not the 3 point seasons.

There's no slaughter. There's no conservation concern. There are no stupid elk. If there aren't more hunters, there will be NO hunting either.

[Timbow]

We need a 6 point restriction on elk almost as bad a we need a ban on the grizzly bear.

[Fisher-Dude]

What needs to happen is a province wide look at what populations can sustain a, for example, 3pt or better season. Which, by the sounds of it many areas in the province can, not just the east kootenays. If a population can sustain such a season, make it happen (and not one of these 7 day things, I'm talking weeks), enough of this protecting ones back yard from the evil outsiders BS. Open up MANY areas, not just 1 or 2, spread out the hunters over many areas and many days. If its not an issue of conservation then it shouldn't be an issue.

7-35 and down will be 3 point or better next season if my sources are accurate. :wink:

[budismyhorse]

I started hunting the EK for elk in 1978. My dad started in 1953ish. I go for 2 weeks every year if I can. Maybe missed 5 or 6 years since 1978 due to work or studies. I have family in Sparwood.

I was there with twice the hunters and a fully sustainable 3 point bull elk season. It was better for everyone at that time, the elk included, as they weren't splattered all over the sides of highway 3 with Kenworth imprints in their flanks. Those elk we hunted in the 70s 80s and 90s with twice the hunters weren't stupid, weren't nocturnal, and were all over the place, just like they are now. Over-extension of the cow/calf LEH and a wicked winter knocked the elk numbers down, not the 3 point seasons.

There's no slaughter. There's no conservation concern. There are no stupid elk. If there aren't more hunters, there will be NO hunting either.


Fair enough Fisher, I hope you are right!

I don't agree with you 100%, I think with all the access now, things would be different from back then. but that is an entirely different subject.

and if your sources are correct and they implement the immature bull season, we'll talk again next year about whether there will be a slaughter or not. I can't see how there wouldn't be 70-80% elk hunter success (initially) under that season.

cheers, thanks for the discussion.

[BCrams]

Fair enough Fisher, I hope you are right!

I don't agree with you 100%, I think with all the access now, things would be different from back then. but that is an entirely different subject.

and if your sources are correct and they implement the immature bull season, we'll talk again next year about whether there will be a slaughter or not. I can't see how there wouldn't be 70-80% elk hunter success (initially) under that season.

cheers, thanks for the discussion.

If you're a bio, I would think you could clearly see what GG and Fisher-Dude are saying is true and the direction in which we need to move.

[Fisher-Dude]

I don't agree with you 100%, I think with all the access now, things would be different from back then. but that is an entirely different subject.



Actually, there was MORE access back in the 70s and 80s before all the access management plans in the Trench were put in place. There are more road closures/access restrictions in the EK than anywhere else in the province.

[budismyhorse]

If you're a bio, I would think you could clearly see what GG and Fisher-Dude are saying is true and the direction in which we need to move.

I knew that was going to bite me in the ass. HA!

so am I not allowed my own opinion BCrams? So are you saying just because a biologist says its so that means it is completely correct? I wish things in my work were that simple. Biologists also set up the LEH cow/calf nightmare of the 80's and are also getting pressured by the Ranchers.....

I thought this was a discussion? not just listen to what 2 guys say and nod. I prefer to get involved and question when I feel its necessary.

I feel strongly about this subject and am discussing it with others that to feel the same way. It isn't an ugly fight, we are all playing nice. It is just discussion, no?

[budismyhorse]

Actually, there was MORE access back in the 70s and 80s before all the access management plans in the Trench were put in place. There are more road closures/access restrictions in the EK than anywhere else in the province.

true about the access management, but there are so many more roads due to logging and exploration.... instead of guys driving one main vein, you have people driving countless spur roads and further expansion into valleys ect.

look at the Elk Valley! the South country! the list goes on. logging has really opened those places up and the road closures don't get them all.

not only that, road closures are easy access as well. roadless valleys are not the same as road closed areas. people can hike/bike/horse in and hunt these areas way harder than if there was just a old guide trail into it.


I live here Fisher, I work in the bush. I dont know what to say other than that. I'll look into some access info if you want true numbers, I am sure it is out there. I am no expert I am just discussing this stuff with you guys.

peace

[BCrams]

I knew that was going to bite me in the ass. HA!

so am I not allowed my own opinion BCrams? So are you saying just because a biologist says its so that means it is completely correct? I wish things in my work were that simple. Biologists also set up the LEH cow/calf nightmare of the 80's and are also getting pressured by the Ranchers.....

I thought this was a discussion? not just listen to what 2 guys say and nod. I prefer to get involved and question when I feel its necessary.

I feel strongly about this subject and am discussing it with others that to feel the same way. It isn't an ugly fight, we are all playing nice. It is just discussion, no?

It indeed is a discussion. But its also an education of sorts for those who do not have full knowledge of what is really going on. Hence, we hope you and others reading this will walk away realizing that 2+2 is 4 and not 1

Aside from that - one is allowed their own personal opinion but those same individuals also need to swallow their opinions and put them aside for the better when it comes to current proposals put forth to improve hunting opportunities.

The LEH nightmare of the 80's was Demarchi's doing. There are some biologists, of whom have been swayed and biased in favour of Guide Outfitters and also in many cases - their own personal opinions of which need to be put aside. Even if the status quo says we want it this way, they need to realize it isn't the best thing. Case in point with the only 4 pt whitetail season in North America in Region 7b. Why why why????

I have met and talked with the biologist from Region 4 and he is one smart person. What he puts down on the table as far as wildlife management in Region 4 are smart moves on behalf of all hunters in BC.

Its a good thing you're listening and asking questions and it appears every so slowly that you're realizing that "hmmmm, we indeed can support a 3 pt elk season and it will indeed help hunting and hunter recruitment".

As far as the ranchers go, current biologist need to learn that they must go back to the arms length approach and professionalism when dealing with these matters.

[GoatGuy]

So are you saying just because a biologist says its so that means it is completely correct? I wish things in my work were that simple. Biologists also set up the LEH cow/calf nightmare of the 80's and are also getting pressured by the Ranchers.....

That's unfair - you've got one of the sharpest biologists in the province working in region 4 right now.

If you're a biologist you know his reputation as a hardcore researcher and his take on 3 pt. You should also know the implications on genetics and management across NA.


It's usually the hunters that want to manage things too conservatively - surprised to hear it's coming from a biologist.

[GoatGuy]

true about the access management, but there are so many more roads due to logging and exploration.... instead of guys driving one main vein, you have people driving countless spur roads and further expansion into valleys ect.

look at the Elk Valley! the South country! the list goes on. logging has really opened those places up and the road closures don't get them all.

not only that, road closures are easy access as well. roadless valleys are not the same as road closed areas. people can hike/bike/horse in and hunt these areas way harder than if there was just a old guide trail into it.


Shouldn't that help distribute the harvest across the region and help eliminate the stress associated with low bull:cow ratios?

[budismyhorse]

well said BCrams


I am taking all this in, it has been very interesting.

[budismyhorse]

That's unfair - you've got one of the sharpest biologists in the province working in region 4 right now.

If you're a biologist you know his reputation as a hardcore researcher and his take on 3 pt. You should also know the implications on genetics and management across NA.


It's usually the hunters that want to manage things too conservatively - surprised to hear it's coming from a biologist.


So I say it and I get slammed for it. That has been said throughout the thread! THat has been said numerous times then I use it as an example against the popular vote and I get slammed.

alright, I get it. Don't rock the boat

Where is the room for another opinion?

[rocksteady]

[quote=GoatGuy;244081]That's unfair - you've got one of the sharpest biologists in the province working in region 4 right now.

He may the best biologist ever to walk the face of the planet, but as long as the Ranchers are being the puppetmasters of the MLA and thus the MOE...His expertise and sharpness will never be give its true respect.....

Thats the way all governments work.....Remember all of the "experts" who criticized gun registration???? Still happened...

[hunter1947]

The key ticket to balance a healthy elk head is 20 bulls to 100 cows ,it is a must. What I saw in were I hunted in the EK last year was about smack on ,I saw 15 bulls to 125 cow and calf's. I was in there hunting for 5 weeks. I myself know that it should be mandatory to send in your tooth and report your kill within ten days after the kill ,this way the management has got a handle on how many have been shot in that region for that year. You have to control the racial bull to cow and keep it that way. In 1997 the elk population from what I heard fell to 7000 in the the EK ,I have heard that it is up around 22000 today. As for new recruitment for new young hunters ,its not about dropping animals ,its to do with the new generation nowadays ,I'm positive on that. As for cattle grazing on crown land ,thats a no ,no ,they eat up all the elk habitat in the areas they feed on. The cattle men have a big say in what rules are brought down and it would be hard to change the rules . You people in cranbrook just go up gold creek main at the start ,what do you see ,you got it cattle ,where are the dumping there crap ,you got it in your drinking water. As for low line areas were elk are ,the elk are there and populate there because of the habitat ,farmers fields alfalfa fields Etc ,after years they continue to populate ,why would they go anywhere else when dinner is there for them all the time.

[rocksteady]

As for low line areas were elk are ,the elk are there and populate there because of the habitat ,farmers fields alfalfa fields Etc ,after years they continue to populate ,why would they go anywhere else when dinner is there for them all the time.

Not being sarcastic but why would they go way back up a mountain to find there is sweet diddly to eat but cow crap...

I just wish the ranchers would suck it up....

Hunter1947 if you came to my house and drank all my beer at breakfast (not that it would happen), would you be mad if I came to your house and drank all your whiskey at dinner...????

I doubt it, so why should ranchers have the best of all worlds----
Private land for crops
Subsidized fencing
Subsidized fuel (purple gas)
Subsidized equipment and tax writeoffs
Insanely cheap Crown pasture costs (AUM's)
An incredibly powerful Livestock Association
A puppet for a MLA.......

Our Crown range policies and rules and costs are the most pansy of any province or state in North America......

Ranchers rule.......Hunters are the fools.....

[hunter1947]

You people out there that are condemning a three point season ,you tell me how this will effect the population of the elk in the the EK ????. If they the elk management know what there doing I can't see there being a problem ,I'm talking about shortening the season for elk in order to have a one week 3 point bull or better. As far as I can remember the season has been open for 6 weeks for bulls. In my books thats to long and as far as I'm concerned they should not have the bull season open in the early part of the rut ,it should open up about the first of Oct till the the end ,4 week season for elk and the one week being 3 point or better in the last week of Nov ,thats my opinion.

[hunter1947]

Not being sarcastic but why would they go way back up a mountain to find there is sweet diddly to eat but cow crap...

I just wish the ranchers would suck it up....

Hunter1947 if you came to my house and drank all my beer at breakfast (not that it would happen), would you be mad if I came to your house and drank all your whiskey at dinner...????

I doubt it, so why should ranchers have the best of all worlds----
Private land for crops
Subsidized fencing
Subsidized fuel (purple gas)
Subsidized equipment and tax writeoffs
Insanely cheap Crown pasture costs (AUM's)
An incredibly powerful Livestock Association
A puppet for a MLA.......

Our Crown range policies and rules and costs are the most pansy of any province or state in North America......

Ranchers rule.......Hunters are the fools.....
You misunderstood me rocksteady ,I agree with you a 100% on the issue about the cattle feeding on crown land ,shouldn't be alowed.:-?.

[rocksteady]

for elk in order to have a one week 3 point bull or better. .

This would be acceptable, the original proposal for a 3 pt season for 6 weeks had potential to devastate a tresure of the Kootenays....

All we around here are asking for is if things are to change lets do it in babysteps....Not just jump in with both feet and blind
:smile::smile::smile:

[DWH]

... do you have any education in the psychology of the group whom we are attempting to recruit?


WTF does that have to do with my 2 cents. Or with this thread? I thought I was able to post my opinions to add to the discussion, not accusations, going on here. Free country but not a free forum? Sorry you feel so threatened by my opinion that you have to be aggressive and attackful.



... you seem to think that I or other proponents of the 3 point season are in it for ourselves...


I never pointed any fingers at anyone specifically not to encourage this type of a response but rather to present my opinion. I am not sure why you feel so personally threatened by my opinion.




I get a bit tired of having those who volunteer countless hours of their time being accused of being in it for themselves.

Where did this come from?



IF there is no conservation concern, wildlife is to be managed for hunting opportunity.


I already supported this.



... Do you want to lose YOUR hunting opportunities to some rich yankee hunter?


Another statement that was unnecessarily facetious.

Looking for a thread where the opinions of hunters count for something. This thread is becoming a one-sided extension of some people's personal agendas.

[rocksteady]

This thread is becoming a one-sided extension of some people's personal agendas.

One's "personal agenda" may actually be one's "personal passion".....Elk hunting and associated discussions are mine..."I'm Rocksteady...and Yes I am an Elkaholic...."

As long as there are no direct insults, intellectual debate is a good thing...If this thread was going sideways fast, don't you think it would have been locked by a mod????

I think we are all playing fairly nice.....Too bad it wasn't around a campfire with a cold brew to really get people riled:smile::smile:

[sawmill]

I totally agree with RockSteady about the cattle on free range.You must know the 3 bar herd that runs the whole Perry Creek and St.Mary`s area.Everywhere you go in that area is either covered in cows or cow shit,they eat the forage flat and they range from the river bottoms right up to tree line.I AM SICK of having cattle around every corner and wandering through camp at night,especially when they are just a tax write off for rich Non Canadians who own the"Ranch"
I grew up on a cattle ranch and you do not leave pregnant cows to calve in the bush.I have seen so many pregnant cows and so many 3 to 4 week old calves in July,30 miles from the farm,shit they have cows calving in august.Piss poor management in my opinion.Tax write off.Dead livestock is worth a lot more for insurance than ship to market steers.Get them off that land.

[rocksteady]

Thanks Sawmill, I was waiting for you to chime in....Surprised Chevy has not given his opinion from the Elk Valley perspective, yet...

[sawmill]

My computer has been down RockSteady,I am sure it`s the wifes Face book that picked up a bug!:confused:

[Timbow]

I have been keeping track of this thread and find it interesting and informative. Thanks guys.

Not to bud-in late into the game, but why do we these restrictions? I don't buy the idea that a 3 point or better will devistate the elk population. If anything, don't you think it would take a lot of the pressure off of the breeding bulls with the majority of the hunters harvesting the smaller bulls?

I don't know if some of you hunt deer around the Mcleese Lake area. I would bet you that there are more deer killed on the highway and railway than what the annual hunting pressure will harvest for that area. Yet the MOE won't allocate a doe season. LEH seems to be the practice here.

On the other side of the coin is what some might see what would happen. Introducing a 3 point rule for one region while the neighbouring regions bolster the 6 point rule will concentrate more hunting pressure in the 3 point area depending on access. This is where I think the problem may lie. If you don't think it would happen, believe me I have. Region 5 with the general bull moose season.

Cheers

[GoatGuy]

So I say it and I get slammed for it. That has been said throughout the thread! THat has been said numerous times then I use it as an example against the popular vote and I get slammed.

alright, I get it. Don't rock the boat

Where is the room for another opinion?

I'm just surprised - figured you'd have a bit more support for your argument.

[horshur]

[quote=Fisher-Dude;244032]Did you read the Zeman study? And do you have any education in the psychology of the group whom we are attempting to recruit?quote]

Fisher...I do have education in Psychology and Sociology and many years working in youth Corrections and group homes. Also a summer or two in the inner city. We tried Outdoor Activities with troubled youth from rock climbing to ten day canoe or horse pack trips. I have been there and done that.

The tradition has been degraded to the point it is non sustaining. I am sure Jessie knows that when birth rates drop below replacement in nations there has never been a precedent where they returned to former fertility rates again. This is the Same shit different pile but......not really that different at all.

The truth of the matter is that 'Instant Gratification' is the Antitheses of a hunting experience.

[Everett]

I totally agree with RockSteady about the cattle on free range.You must know the 3 bar herd that runs the whole Perry Creek and St.Mary`s area.Everywhere you go in that area is either covered in cows or cow shit,they eat the forage flat and they range from the river bottoms right up to tree line.I AM SICK of having cattle around every corner and wandering through camp at night,especially when they are just a tax write off for rich Non Canadians who own the"Ranch"
I grew up on a cattle ranch and you do not leave pregnant cows to calve in the bush.I have seen so many pregnant cows and so many 3 to 4 week old calves in July,30 miles from the farm,shit they have cows calving in august.Piss poor management in my opinion.Tax write off.Dead livestock is worth a lot more for insurance than ship to market steers.Get them off that land.

I have had a couple of scarey interactions with cows and my truck up Perry Creek the last couple of years. I actualy saw three cows at 6000 feet this year. Also seen the remains of more than one calf this year as well. Resident wolf pack may solve some problems. The Ranchers are definatly a problem in my not so humble opinion. But they probbaly think hunters and our Elk are a problem as well. Oh and I am for a five point season this coming season because there is a couple of big 5 points around here that need shooting. Its also a gradual change is easier for the the flat earth crowd to absorb.

[hunter1947]

I have been keeping track of this thread and find it interesting and informative. Thanks guys.

Not to bud-in late into the game, but why do we these restrictions? I don't buy the idea that a 3 point or better will devistate the elk population. If anything, don't you think it would take a lot of the pressure off of the breeding bulls with the majority of the hunters harvesting the smaller bulls?

I don't know if some of you hunt deer around the Mcleese Lake area. I would bet you that there are more deer killed on the highway and railway than what the annual hunting pressure will harvest for that area. Yet the MOE won't allocate a doe season. LEH seems to be the practice here.

On the other side of the coin is what some might see what would happen. Introducing a 3 point rule for one region while the neighbouring regions bolster the 6 point rule will concentrate more hunting pressure in the 3 point area depending on access. This is where I think the problem may lie. If you don't think it would happen, believe me I have. Region 5 with the general bull moose season.

Cheers You don't know if a 3 point season will work unless you try it for a couple years. Yes it will put more pressure in the one area that will be open for 3 point season ,but in the other hand if you don't try it then how are you going to know if it will work or fail???. If management opened up 3 points in the last week of nov as I stated a few posts back ,the elk aren't going to be in the rut at this time ,you won't be able to call them in and if properly managed I can't see there being a problem. Buy opening the season for all elk on the first day of Oct till the end will allow the big bulls to pregnant the cows without being shot off. This will allow the big bulls that have the pool jeans to pass on a healthy new boron in the spring and the young bulls that are boron will develop into a 6x6 in the years to come.. Lets face it how long of a season do you really need to have in order to to hunt elk???. Letting the bulls bread without shooting off a percentage of them during the prime time of the rut will allow the bulls to peregrinate 80% of the cows in the month of Sept. Just put it this way what happens when a big heard bull gets shot at the opening season or latter on in Sept ???. The younger satellite bull moves in and takes over the herd ,then you got a poo er pool jean happening when the satellite bull breeds with the cow ,maybe thats why we are having so many 5x5 out there ,like people have said on this issue before ,once a five always a five. It's been about 11 years now since they induced 6 point only and it's been long enough to see what the out come has brought. I myself in the area I hunted last year have never seen that many 5x5 and yes some had a good number of cows with him ,these 5x5 bulls had monster racks on them ,I would say a couple of them would score in the 320 point range. http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif PS the only thing about having a 4 week season on elk is the guide outfitters are going to squawk and they have a big impact when it comes to implementing the hunting regs.
http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon13.gif.

[budismyhorse]

I'm just surprised - figured you'd have a bit more support for your argument.

Goat Guy your surprised??? don't give me that BS. I am surprised by YOU and BCrams telling me how I am supposed to think! I can't believe it even now! Your saying because I am a bio I should think this and that. And then crank on about a biologist that has NOTHING to do with my OPINION.

I was warned about this "fraternity" that exists on this website and after having a day long discussion with some guys about this subject all day, you and BCrams chime in about what I should think and how your afraid of how my opinion is going to effect others reading this stuff.

Hey, why don't I just give you my information and you can write the posts for me, would that work for you??

I"M SURPRISED I have to defend my right to opinion! Just because I had to write a quick email and run out the door doesn't mean I have no support for my argument, that is a CHILDISH thing to say GG. Last time I checked I don't live in CUBA and therefore I can thiink and say anything I want.

Great debate tactics, you run out of things to say, so you chime in with some childish jab that has no meaning to a day-long discussion.

BCrams "It indeed is a discussion. But its also an education of sorts for those who do not have full knowledge of what is really going on. Hence, we hope you and others reading this will walk away realizing that 2+2 is 4 and not 1

Aside from that - one is allowed their own personal opinion but those same individuals also need to swallow their opinions and put them aside for the better when it comes to current proposals put forth to improve hunting opportunities."

GoatGuy "If you're a biologist you know his reputation as a hardcore researcher and his take on 3 pt. You should also know the implications on genetics and management across NA.


It's usually the hunters that want to manage things too conservatively - surprised to hear it's coming from a biologist."


All that "But this..." and you should this.....and surprised to hear this.....

your surprised to hear and opinion?! It isn't YOUR opinion, I said it not you.

[budismyhorse]

I have said my piece, you all know where I stand, I can't afford to stay on this forum and defend this all day, I have to get some work done.

I should also say, All along, I am getting silent support though PM's about this subject. What that tells me is that there are alot more guys out there in support of treating this change in legislation conservatively, they just aren't saying it on this forum because they know it is not the popular vote and there are some heavy voices that they don't want to dissapoint.

[Elkaholic]

I was actually at a meeting with Dave Dunbar, in which he stated that what HE truly would love to do is have 6pt season PLUS and controlled way to harvest more 3pt and better bulls to more effectively manage the herd. But he said that he gets very little support for his way of thinking.

I think there needs to be change to the season, but what change who knows. I have stated some thoughts and been blasted by the ELITE FEW before so I will not waste my time to offer suggestions. Just letting you know that the BIO wants to change things and is looking at new ideas but is getting blasted for it.

[J_T]

Elkaholic,

I've talked with Dave about this, and to others who have discussed the Reg 4 biologist. He is one of the most proactive and exciting strategist/researchers I have met. A breath of fresh air.

However, he works within a system.

To make good change, Government needs to adopt a far more dynamic (on-the-fly) decision making approach. It can't take 2 or 3 years to implement a good idea, or adjust a bad one.

As we look to any change in the EK Elk, we have to address concerns of the Ranchers. We also have to address what is going on with (or lack of action) elk in the West kootenay.

Regarding hunter numbers and access in the 70's or 80's. I'm pretty certain that quads and trucks of those eras, were not what they are today. It's a factor.

[bighornbob]

I should also say, All along, I am getting silent support though PM's about this subject. What that tells me is that there are alot more guys out there in support of treating this change in legislation conservatively, they just aren't saying it on this forum because they know it is not the popular vote and there are some heavy voices that they don't want to dissapoint.

You have to remember PM's are a two way street. Your PM's are positive to what you are thinking but what are my PM's and other guys PM's saying about you and your opinion and you being a bio and thinking like this.

Just something to think about.

BHB

[budismyhorse]

BHB,

I should mention that I am a fisheries biologist, WHen I mentioned that, I was just using it to convey that I know how to interpret stats and data.

"thinking like this"

Thinking like what???? I am just stating an opinion. based on my own experience and research, it has nothing to do with my occupation. I fully respect what Dave D is, has and will do for us. We are all very excited.

If you have PMs from guys saying they don't like my opinion, well..... that is their opinion. I have no problem with that. You guys are just having a hard time excepting someone elses opinion. The reason I state this, is because I had to defend it all day long from multiple different hunters. I rarely asked people to defend their opinion, in fact, I welcomed it into the discussion.

the fact that I had to defend it all day is what these guys are saying to me. They don't appreciate the "good old boys" and "elite few" on here that continually blast people for speaking up and offering a different opinion.

simple as that.

Just something for you to think about.

cheers!!

regards!

[GoatGuy]

Goat Guy your surprised??? don't give me that BS. I am surprised by YOU and BCrams telling me how I am supposed to think! I can't believe it even now! Your saying because I am a bio I should think this and that. And then crank on about a biologist that has NOTHING to do with my OPINION.

GoatGuy "If you're a biologist you know his reputation as a hardcore researcher and his take on 3 pt. You should also know the implications on genetics and management across NA.


It's usually the hunters that want to manage things too conservatively - surprised to hear it's coming from a biologist."


All that "But this..." and you should this.....and surprised to hear this.....

your surprised to hear and opinion?! It isn't YOUR opinion, I said it not you.

I did not say you had to agree and can't have had an opinion I just figured you would have supported your argument with some facts.

Usually people with a background in biology at least have some rational other than nocturnal elk. Like having a guy go out fishing, not catch anything and say the lake winter killed - sounds good to some but with a background you should know better.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion but if you're giving it, particularly as a biologist, in the least you should know it and support it that's all.

You might also find you are not the only biologist here and that some of the people have spent a bitof time following those elk around in the Kootenays and no we aren't talking about hunting season.

[Fisher-Dude]

No one is "blasting" you, but people are questioning your posts and challenging your conclusions. Lots of people challenge my posts and I don't start a pity party, as I'd rather engage them in debate around the issues here. That's what the forum is for.

[BCrams]

Goat Guy your surprised??? don't give me that BS. I am surprised by YOU and BCrams telling me how I am supposed to think! I can't believe it even now! Your saying because I am a bio I should think this and that. And then crank on about a biologist that has NOTHING to do with my OPINION.

I was warned about this "fraternity" that exists on this website and after having a day long discussion with some guys about this subject all day, you and BCrams chime in about what I should think and how your afraid of how my opinion is going to effect others reading this stuff.

Hey, why don't I just give you my information and you can write the posts for me, would that work for you??

I"M SURPRISED I have to defend my right to opinion! Just because I had to write a quick email and run out the door doesn't mean I have no support for my argument, that is a CHILDISH thing to say GG. Last time I checked I don't live in CUBA and therefore I can thiink and say anything I want.

Great debate tactics, you run out of things to say, so you chime in with some childish jab that has no meaning to a day-long discussion.

BCrams "It indeed is a discussion. But its also an education of sorts for those who do not have full knowledge of what is really going on. Hence, we hope you and others reading this will walk away realizing that 2+2 is 4 and not 1

Aside from that - one is allowed their own personal opinion but those same individuals also need to swallow their opinions and put them aside for the better when it comes to current proposals put forth to improve hunting opportunities."

GoatGuy "If you're a biologist you know his reputation as a hardcore researcher and his take on 3 pt. You should also know the implications on genetics and management across NA.


It's usually the hunters that want to manage things too conservatively - surprised to hear it's coming from a biologist."


All that "But this..." and you should this.....and surprised to hear this.....

your surprised to hear and opinion?! It isn't YOUR opinion, I said it not you.

Let me be clear. I never asked you to change your opinion. I have many opinions myself and one example I can give is that I am a trophy hunter when it comes to mule deer. Part of me would love to have seasons that caters to trophy hunters so that I can hunt and kill more big bucks - but my vote goes to seasons that are more favourable for all hunters such as removing 4 point restrictions etc.

The point is, you can have opinions, but the biologist in you should easily recognize we can have a 3 pt season, remove the LEH elk from the West Kootenays - even though your personal opinions say otherwise.

Yes, GG, Fisherdude and others will chime in everytime someone says their opinion (not just you - but anyone). Those 'not in the know' could easily take it as 'hey, thats right' if the likes of GG and others do not speak up to put the 'facts' down on the table for them to read.

[bighornbob]

You guys are just having a hard time excepting someone elses opinion. The reason I state this, is because I had to defend it all day long from multiple different hunters. I rarely asked people to defend their opinion, in fact, I welcomed it into the discussion.


Having opinions is great and talking about them even better but people have to see the bigger picture and that is hunting numbers have declined (fact not an opinion). The majority that have quit in the last 20years is due to limited hunting oppurtunities and point restrictions (fact not an opinion).

The elk have come back great and the numbers say they are at or above the pre crash years so if conservation is not an issue why have a point restriction when we know this kills off hunter numbers (fact).

BHB

[BCrams]

The elk have come back great and the numbers say they are at or above the pre crash years so if conservation is not an issue why have a point restriction when we know this kills off hunter numbers (fact).

BHB

Even though BHB's 'opinion' is he thinks he should have an entire region to himself and everyone else goes elsewhere.

[bighornbob]

Even though BHB's 'opinion' is he thinks he should have an entire region to himself and everyone else goes elsewhere.


No my opinion would be screw the elk in the koots, I should be the only one allowed to hunt sheep in 3-17.:eek::lol:

BHB

[BCrams]

No my opinion would be screw the elk in the koots, I should be the only one allowed to hunt sheep in 3-17.:eek::lol:

BHB

Thats actually what I meant!

[hunter1947]

The same people that are being mauled by the Ranchers to do something about all these elk......

You know what, I am a biologist, and I understand the reports and stats and have read your stuff, I just prefer to act conservatively.

and I am not in favour of a 6pt season infinitely, I would like to see a limited 3pt season implemented as well.
That proubly would work fine 3 point on LEH that way they got a handle on how many elk have been taken with the LEH hunts ,shuuuu I should have thought of that ,I guess I had a seniors moment.http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon11.gif.

[KevinB]

Good post Rams.

my 2 bits based on what I've been reading...

Budismyhorse, I don't think anyone here is in any way saying that you are not entitled to your opinion, whatever it might be. You seem to think, though, that unless others nod their heads and agree with you, they are attacking you and saying that you aren't entitled to your opinion. I'm not sure what you expect.... Some people on here have formed their conclusions by taking a hard look at the numbers/stats...and if you enter into a thread (which BTW is going through the exact same things that have been gone through in other similar threads recently) with an opinion that migth go against what the data is clearly saying, you should be prepared to defend what you say, that's all. It's pretty simple, and I don't think anyone here is "slamming" your right to have an opinion. Hey - if someone could show good data that strongly indicated that point restrictions and LEH and the like would somehow lead to an increase in hunter recruitment and retention (as ridiculous as that sounds, and it is), then I would bet my hunting season that these same guys would swallow their pride and get on board with that. They aren't in support of liberal seasons per se just for the hell of it or because they want to be able to shoot whatever moves...they are in support of doing what is needed to ensure our access to our hunting rights, now and in the future. They support the removal of point restrictions and LEH, where feasible, because it is a big step towards that goal (and their is very good data that shows that this is the case). I've read the Zeman paper, and frankly, it worries me a bit, and I think it should make anyone stop and think about the big picture if nothing else. I'm only 36 and I want to keep hunting until I'm old and grey, if possible.

BTW, no-one is pushing for a season that isn't sustainable by the herd...what they are pushing for is a season that increases opportunity while still meeting conservation needs. No-one is saying that we shouldn't be careful when thinking about what kind of season to implement.

BUT this is a great discussion, I don't see it going sideways at all and I think there's a bunch of us who are learning a lot, me included.

[budismyhorse]

thanks KevinB,

I truely think we are all in this together, and what you are pointing out in that post is correct.

Forgive me for not being part of all the previous threads, but until I see some hard evidence in the form of a report, I am not roaring ahead with a blanket 3pt season, regardless of what previous threads or posters who have been battling for a few months now say.

I'll be the first guy to jump on board when that completed, hard evidence comes out.

I definitely feel the need for increased recruitment and getting guys back in the bush hunting again. I just an not entirely sure it should be on the backs of the Region 4 bull elk,.....not entirely sure, but reading the right paper, or listening to the right person or professional tell me its ok will change that.

But I'm not sure you can argue that there isn't a little bit of "Bullying" that goes on around here.:wink:

These guys are saying there is all this support for a 3pt season, but where is the hard evidence? I am in on a few calls to the local MOE office as well as others (including Garth Mowat),

I am relatively new to this "formal" arguement and am in the process of getting up to snuff. Bear with me!!

thx

regards

[Fisher-Dude]

But I'm not sure you can argue that there isn't a little bit of "Bullying" that goes on around here.:wink:

These guys are saying there is all this support for a 3pt season, but where is the hard evidence?

Well, the "bullies" account for 77% of the votes FOR a 3 point season on bull elk where there is no conservation concern. So far, that indicates a darned high level of support! :wink:

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=19460

[KevinB]

thanks KevinB,

I truely think we are all in this together, and what you are pointing out in that post is correct.

Forgive me for not being part of all the previous threads, but until I see some hard evidence in the form of a report, I am not roaring ahead with a blanket 3pt season, regardless of what previous threads or posters who have been battling for a few months now say.

I'll be the first guy to jump on board when that completed, hard evidence comes out.

I definitely feel the need for increased recruitment and getting guys back in the bush hunting again. I just an not entirely sure it should be on the backs of the Region 4 bull elk,.....not entirely sure, but reading the right paper, or listening to the right person or professional tell me its ok will change that.

Fair enough. FD just posted the contact info for the regional Bio. on the otehr thread, and I'd post the link to the Zeman study, but I'll be damned if I can seem to find it. have a look through these threads, it's here somewhere.

But I'm not sure you can argue that there isn't a little bit of "Bullying" that goes on around here.:wink:

Sure. But only when folks are passionate about things. I bet ya can take it though:cool: A lot of people feel (rightly or wrongly) that they have been "bullied" into keeping the 6-point season when there is apparently no conservation concern.

These guys are saying there is all this support for a 3pt season, but where is the hard evidence? I am in on a few calls to the local MOE office as well as others (including Garth Mowat),

I am relatively new to this "formal" arguement and am in the process of getting up to snuff. Bear with me!!

Welcome aboard!!



**thanks FD for the nifty technique of using blue italicized text to make the reply thing quicker. I'm gonna steal that idea!**

[DWH]

Well, the "bullies" account for 77% of the votes FOR a 3 point season on bull elk where there is no conservation concern. So far, that indicates a darned high level of support! :wink:

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=19460

Or a lack of adequate options.

[BCrams]

Or a lack of adequate options.

Doesn't matter. The consensus shows the majority want to be able to have the opportunity to hunt something they have a reasonable chance of success at.

Don't worry. From your pic, it looks as though you guys are as avid as they get and you'll continue dropping nice 6 point bull elk.

[DWH]

Did you read the Zeman study?

Yes. Gleaning out what information you would find useful in your arguement, you forgot to mention the other factors for declining hunter numbers:

Cost of Fuel
Cost of Licensing
CORE
Restrictive Regulations
Complexity of Regulations
Gun Control
Spare Time
Demographics
Opportunities
Hunter Education
Changing Lifestyles
Social Perception

...predominant reasons:
1) Barriers to entry
2) Overall cost of hunting
3) Management strategies
4) Social Factors

Also:
“There are theories as to why resident hunter numbers have declined in British Columbia; however, there is no conclusive evidence that identifies the cause(s) of the decline.”

Fear mongering to gather increased support for your side me thinks. And you've put alot of your support on a paper written by a student and not a biologist this time, that's surprising.

Is there a decline in hunter numbers? No question about it.

Is improving hunter numbers crucial to the future of hunting? Absolutely.

Will opening up the EK to a 3pt GOS be the solution? Limited at best. It is my opinion that more than anything you'll simply be shifting current hunters into the region with limited overall recruitment/retention.

Will the 3pt GOS in the EK be detrimental to the elk population? Maybe not. But combined with other factors (increased hunter pressure, reduced habitat and forage, harsh winters - like the one we might expect this year, increased predation, etc, etc...) the result could put us right back to where we were when the 6pt season was implemented, and we're back to square one. Some of these factors are out of anyone's control and cannot be predicted. Adaptive management, rather than an aggressive change, is the only way to ensure this could never happen. How to achieve adaptive management is can of worms I can't comment on.

Am I supportive of something that falls between 3pt GOS and 6pt GOS? Yes.

Am I supportive of a 3pt GOS after a few years of reduced antler restrictions showing no detrimental change to the population (i.e maintaining the required bull:cow and cow:calf ratios) or to the hunting experience? Yes.

One more comment regarding the imminent 'slaughter' that has both been talked about and criticized. The new season that opened last year (2007) in region 8-15 for 6pt or better, was an absolute gong show. Hunters, vehicles, quads, camps, weekend/road warriors everywhere. Blast off a bugle and before you know it there are 3 hunters coming around the corner to glass you. A buddies Dad even glassed someone who had their scope on him after he let out a bugle (obviously an atypical hunter). In my opinion, to keep a similar situation from happening in the EK, other areas would have to be opened up (provided there is adequate science) subsequently to aleviate hunting pressure.

I am going to throw one of these :wink: in because it seems to allow the user a grace from their comments being seen as too harsh. I appreciate and look forward to all the opinions that are coming out on this thread, and I am learning alot in the process.

On a side note... I am a bit familiar with what HCTF does with our money (hunting and fishing licenses) and maybe I can extend the learning hand to others who think HCTF hasn't contributed:
http://www.hctf.ca/projects/index.html

[6616]

This would be acceptable, the original proposal for a 3 pt season for 6 weeks had potential to devastate a tresure of the Kootenays....

All we around here are asking for is if things are to change lets do it in babysteps....Not just jump in with both feet and blind
:smile::smile::smile:


The original proposal was for 10 days

[6616]

Puppet for an MLA? I believe he has done far more for hunters and anglers than for the cattlemen!

[Fisher-Dude]

Yes. Gleaning out what information you would find useful in your arguement, you forgot to mention the other factors for declining hunter numbers:

Cost of Fuel
Cost of Licensing
CORE
Restrictive Regulations
Complexity of Regulations
Gun Control
Spare Time
Demographics
Opportunities
Hunter Education
Changing Lifestyles
Social Perception

Can I/we change the cost of fuel? Can I/we can gun control? Can I/we change spare time? Can I/we change cost of licensing? But maybe I/we can change things like restrictive regulations, complex regulations, opportunities, social perception, education, etc, and those are the things we are working on.

...predominant reasons:
1) Barriers to entry
2) Overall cost of hunting
3) Management strategies
4) Social Factors

We're looking at barriers to entry and trying to break them down (ie proposals to combine CORE and PAL). Not much we can do about the cost except make some new buddies who are keen to hunt and share costs. Management strategies - that's what this thread is all about changing! Social factors - perhaps working through our clubs to get to kids EARLY and show them what a great lifestyle fishing and hunting is CAN affect social factors in our favour!

Also:
“There are theories as to why resident hunter numbers have declined in British Columbia; however, there is no conclusive evidence that identifies the cause(s) of the decline.”

Fear mongering to gather increased support for your side me thinks. And you've put alot of your support on a paper written by a student and not a biologist this time, that's surprising.

Who says a biologist can interpret statistics from a survey better than a business student? The survey had nothing to do with biology and everything to do with statistical sampling, which is, as a former business student myself can attest, a HUGE part of a business degree!

Is there a decline in hunter numbers? No question about it.

Is improving hunter numbers crucial to the future of hunting? Absolutely.

Will opening up the EK to a 3pt GOS be the solution? Limited at best. It is my opinion that more than anything you'll simply be shifting current hunters into the region with limited overall recruitment/retention.

Limited? How do you know that? And all the proponents of the 3 point elk season are the same folks who are proponents of new/increased opportunities throughout the province.

Will the 3pt GOS in the EK be detrimental to the elk population? Maybe not. But combined with other factors (increased hunter pressure, reduced habitat and forage, harsh winters - like the one we might expect this year, increased predation, etc, etc...) the result could put us right back to where we were when the 6pt season was implemented, and we're back to square one. Some of these factors are out of anyone's control and cannot be predicted. Adaptive management, rather than an aggressive change, is the only way to ensure this could never happen. How to achieve adaptive management is can of worms I can't comment on.

I'm still at a loss trying to figure out how you come to this conclusion when twice the number of hunters had decades of sustainable 3 point elk hunting in the EK, without even spreading pressure out to other regions (7A and 7B for example).

Am I supportive of something that falls between 3pt GOS and 6pt GOS? Yes.

Am I supportive of a 3pt GOS after a few years of reduced antler restrictions showing no detrimental change to the population (i.e maintaining the required bull:cow and cow:calf ratios) or to the hunting experience? Yes.

One more comment regarding the imminent 'slaughter' that has both been talked about and criticized. The new season that opened last year (2007) in region 8-15 for 6pt or better, was an absolute gong show. Hunters, vehicles, quads, camps, weekend/road warriors everywhere. Blast off a bugle and before you know it there are 3 hunters coming around the corner to glass you. A buddies Dad even glassed someone who had their scope on him after he let out a bugle (obviously an atypical hunter). In my opinion, to keep a similar situation from happening in the EK, other areas would have to be opened up (provided there is adequate science) subsequently to aleviate hunting pressure.

So comparing the experience in one MU versus some 35 MUs (EK and WK are both being considered for elk regulation changes) is valid? Hardly.

I am going to throw one of these :wink: in because it seems to allow the user a grace from their comments being seen as too harsh. I appreciate and look forward to all the opinions that are coming out on this thread, and I am learning alot in the process.

On a side note... I am a bit familiar with what HCTF does with our money (hunting and fishing licenses) and maybe I can extend the learning hand to others who think HCTF hasn't contributed:
http://www.hctf.ca/projects/index.html

HCTF is good stuff. Glad we agree. :wink:



...................

[Gateholio]

But I'm not sure you can argue that there isn't a little bit of "Bullying" that goes on around here.:wink:

regards

I think there are many opinionated people on HBC, and some more articulate than others.

However, if you feel that you have been unjustly "attacked" then use the report a post feature oin the top of every post.

[Savage Man]

Well all I seem to be reading about a bunch of guys whining about not getting their bulls . Well most of my friends in the kootenay's where I was born and raised and will hopefully live again got their bulls and the ones that didn't said they had a blast with all the bugling they had. I think a bunch of you need to re think why you hunt !!!!!!!!! If it is only for the meet then you are just a killer not a hunter. Thats why they call it hunting and not killing. We all want to get an Elk thats why we hunt them but is a 3 point season that would do a significant amount of damage to the herd just so you guys can fill your tags a good Idea? A junoir season would for three points could be a good idea or I have herd that in Montana any first year hunter can kill any elk but to open up 3 points seems a little crazy to me . Just my two cents worth .

[Fisher-Dude]

I'm adding this valuable tidbit to these threads for all to read:

There is another study that should be read, that was written by John Thornton of the Wildlife Branch:

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/ds/docs/070607_HunterRecruitment-RetentionStrategy.pdf

One of his key findings:

"In general, wildlife managers should adopt a quantity over quality philosophy for deer, moose and elk. Hunting success is strongly related to continued participation, and there are far more hunters that are happy to shoot an average animal than there are hunters whose specific purpose is to bag a trophy. Really skilled hunters are capable of finding impressive animals if they put their minds to it, but hunters of lesser skill find their chances for success greatly limited by trophy management practices. Furthermore, managing for animals with impressive antlers pushes opportunity away from general open seasons and towards Limited Entry hunting, restricting participation even further."

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Okay F/D.....that has to be a new record for posting the same thing multiple times in under 8 seconds:D.

You're lucky it's "good stuff"!!;)

SSS

[Fisher-Dude]

Okay F/D.....that has to be a new record for posting the same thing multiple times in under 8 seconds:D.

You're lucky it's "good stuff"!!;)

SSS

I'm gonna change my name to Cut'N'Paste! :biggrin:

It's for reference - folks were losing track of the links on these threads to the studies.

[Kody94]

I'm adding this valuable tidbit to these threads for all to read:

There is another study that should be read, that was written by John Thornton of the Wildlife Branch:

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/ds/docs/070607_HunterRecruitment-RetentionStrategy.pdf

One of his key findings:

"In general, wildlife managers should adopt a quantity over quality philosophy for deer, moose and elk. Hunting success is strongly related to continued participation, and there are far more hunters that are happy to shoot an average animal than there are hunters whose specific purpose is to bag a trophy. Really skilled hunters are capable of finding impressive animals if they put their minds to it, but hunters of lesser skill find their chances for success greatly limited by trophy management practices. Furthermore, managing for animals with impressive antlers pushes opportunity away from general open seasons and towards Limited Entry hunting, restricting participation even further."

Fisher-Dude,

I have read that report inside-out and backwards too. Without going back to it (ie going by memory here), if I am not mistaken, the basis for conclusions in that comment was GoatGuy's study. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think you are "double dipping" with that one....ie. using a circular reference to validify a point of view.

I don't disagree with the general sentiment in that quoted comment, but I think its a little too general to draw specific conclusions about one-off seasons. 6 pt seasons don't really manage for "impressive antlers", IMHO. And a lot of bulls that are killed are "average animals"...pretty small 6pts. In the context of the EK, what really does constitute and "average animal"? 3pts? Spikes? 5pts?

Anyway, as I mentioned above, I am not against liberalizing the season...but I don't agree with a wholesale change to a 3pt season at this time. Increasing opportunity gradually should address practically everyone's concerns...start with a short 3pt season early, see how it goes, and increase from there if results are good.

Cheers
4Ster

[The Hermit]

Ficher,

Unexperienced hunters (rookies or out of region) usually hit the standard elk areas, and if those places get lit up like a christmas tree whenever a 3pt bull sticks his nose out, there won't be much going on throughout the day, not really nocturnal (if your going to be a jerk about it), but they would be tougher to hunt and a tougher experience for this group of hunters.

Ahh... this is true and is also the prime reason for archery only hunts. It is tough enough to get to within 25 yards on an elk without having them ultra-conscious and wary as a result of rifle shots.

[hunter1947]

Well, the "bullies" account for 77% of the votes FOR a 3 point season on bull elk where there is no conservation concern. So far, that indicates a darned high level of support! :wink:

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=19460 There will be a conservation concern ,but the regs will have to change to conserve the elk.

[brotherjack]

In the context of the EK, what really does constitute and "average animal"? 3pts? Spikes? 5pts?


In my experience, 5 point's are far and away the most common size of elk. I have seen more 5 point bulls than all other possible point sizes put together (by a significant margin). I saw more than a dozen different five point elk last year, but I only saw four sub-5 points (3 spikes and one three point).

As I was pondering the other day, I concluded, for that very reason, that a 5 point season would be almost as nice in my eyes as a 3 point season (me being pretty firmly in the "I just wanna shoot an elk and go home" camp). In addition to the fact that 5 point seems to be the most common size by far - it's one heck of a lot easier (and faster) to make a clean and honest count of 5 points because from most angles, you can identify 5 points at a glance without having to wait for the elk to turn his head two or three different ways and then hold still in each position long enough for you to get a count like you do on a six point (assuming you, like me, actually count each point, and don't just open fire as soon as you see a back fork).



Which brings up another question to throw into the mix here - what do you guys who are so vehemently opposed to a three point season think of a five point season?

[brotherjack]

I think a bunch of you need to re think why you hunt !!!!!!!!! If it is only for the meet then you are just a killer not a hunter.

I 100% disagree with you. I hunt first and foremost to feed my family, and I will not (and should not) apologize to anyone for that. If you think that hunting to feed your family is not a good enough reason to hunt, and that somehow that makes you "not a hunter" if filling the freezer is your primary objective when you hit the field each fall, then I think YOU need to take a long hard look at why YOU hunt!

[rocksteady]

Which brings up another question to throw into the mix here - what do you guys who are so vehemently opposed to a three point season think of a five point season?


A lot of us have conceded that we would be willing to try that....

[KevinB]

I 100% disagree with you. I hunt first and foremost to feed my family, and I will not (and should not) apologize to anyone for that. If you think that hunting to feed your family is not a good enough reason to hunt, and that somehow that makes you "not a hunter" if filling the freezer is your primary objective when you hit the field each fall, then I think YOU need to take a long hard look at why YOU hunt!

You took the words right out of my mouth Brotherjack! very well said.

[Kody94]

A lot of us have conceded that we would be willing to try that....

I personally like the idea of a 5pt season....especially if it was confined to the trench for a couple years (where most of the elk are anyway) so the effects could be monitored before expanding it. I think you could be more liberal with a 5pt season in terms of time, than with a 3pt season too.

Cheers,
4Ster

[hunter1947]

A few years ago my friend in cranbrook had different petitions to sine at malls and other places about 10 years ago regarding different ideas regarding conservation on elk. I don't now if any of you cranbrook people there remember this ???. His Name is Dallas Hills ,he lives off gold creek on 33 street ,he has a paint ball game business there at his home. Anyways he had stacks of papers he showed me that he had when doing his research on elk. One biologist down south it was Montana said to him that point restriction's don't work. The biologist said to him in order to conserve elk you have to manage them for numbers to grow and to have a proper cow to bull ratio. If you do a research on the number of elk there ,I think you will be looking at a number of around 250,000 head.

[Savage Man]

"Elk season in the East Kootenays has ended. All I can say, is I'm am so glad that's over. I spent 40 mornings, and almost as many evenings unsuccessfully hunting elk. Between that, and working during the day, I am just exhausted like you would not believe it. I don't know why I do this to myself." Quote from Brother Jack


So you are trying to tell me that it is cheaper to Hunt 40 times in a year than to buy meat, give me a break. I don't think you should apologize for wanting to feed your family but if this your only concern there are far cheaper ways of going about it. Hunting is away of life and something you should enjoy (the joy of the HUNT ). All I am saying is that elk numbers are good again the east kootenay's why are wanting to kick the heck out of them? Maybe another management strategy is needed but I don't think three point's are the way to go and we need to remember its hunting not killing.

[MOWITCH SLAYER]

the restrictions on elk hunting are all politcal. the six point bull is what the guides want , and the cow calf draws are what the farmers want. it is not and never well be what hunters know it should be

[Vader]

There a lot of hunters that are looking for the Trophy class bulls as well.. They are not all meat hunters.. Many of the successful hunters, and I mean the ones that hike and get their animals nearly every year, try very hard to get a "book" bull. They only take a "meat" bull near the very end and that is one of the reasons they may not get an elk. If you dropped the 6 point season you would tick them off as well.
As said before, and I agree, we should not be managing point size.. we should be managing numbers.. In the old days a healthy herd had 12-20 cows and calves, one herd bull, 5 or six quality satellites, and a mess of spikers. Nowadays, I see more 5 point herd bulls.. on 8-10 cows and calves and couple of raggedy assed bulls and a few spikes.
You can have lots of bugling, which is a hoot, but you don't kill as often as years gone by. Why? Because the horn size has dropped considerably.. This many years of 6 point or better has taken its toll. The genetics are fast dissappearing. The 325 class and up bull kills are lower and lower every year. I've seen some dandy 320 class five points but try as you might you can't grow the sixth on em, and it's been a long time since I've seen a 340 class bull in my binos, and yet we still choose to target, specifically, the 6 point genetics that have survived.

[KevinB]

So you are trying to tell me that it is cheaper to Hunt 40 times in a year than to buy meat, give me a break. I don't think you should apologize for wanting to feed your family but if this your only concern there are far cheaper was of going about it. Hunting is away of life and something you should enjoy (the joy of the HUNT ). All I am saying is that elk numbers are good again the east kootenay's why are wanting to kick the heck out of them? Maybe another management strategy is needed but I don't think three point's are the way to go and we need to remember its hunting not killing.

There is in fact no other way to obtain wild meat in BC other than hunting it...as far as I know. I think the concern is about feeding a family with WILD meat. It's not just about $$, if it were the only way for hunting to EVER be cheaper than going to safeway would be to shoot an animal from your back porch. We all know that, it's not exactly news to anyone...

"All I am saying is that elk numbers are good again the east kootenay's why are wanting to kick the heck out of them? Maybe another management strategy is needed but I don't think three point's are the way to go and

It's been repeatedly stated in all these threads that there is (apparently) no conservation concern with a 3pt season.

"we need to remember its hunting not killing."
No-one is saying it should be made as easy or as intantly gratifying as possible...just that where possible, average everyday hunters should have the reasonable chance of success if the animal populations can support it...how they choose to go about achieving that success is their business. If it means driving up and down a road until something walks out in front of them, so be it. I personally don't see the appeal of that, but then no-one is telling me that's what I have to do. Please do not try to tell anyone else how they should get their enjoyment out of hunting!!! I can hunt however I want and get as much or as little satisfaction out of it as I choose.
End of rant...

[brotherjack]

So you are trying to tell me that it is cheaper to Hunt 40 times in a year than to buy meat, give me a break. I don't think you should apologize for wanting to feed your family but if this your only concern there are far cheaper ways of going about it. Hunting is away of life and something you should enjoy (the joy of the HUNT ). All I am saying is that elk numbers are good again the east kootenay's why are wanting to kick the heck out of them?

Who said anything about "cheaper"? Though, if you wanted to analyze it that way, I live far enough out of town (ie: close enough to good hunting areas) that the gas/etc for a day's hunt costs me about $5 or less. So, figure $400 for a year's hunting gas (assuming I go out both morning and evening, which I usually do), $100 or so for tags, misc hunting related purchases, and I'm out about around $1,000 a year most years. Beef steaks were around $14 each last time I looked at Safeway, and The Wife(tm) and I eat steak almost every night of the year. That makes hunting pretty economical, for me.

But really, in my house, we hunt for the same reason we cut our own firewood and plant our own garden and pick our own berries and make our own jams and jellies, etc, etc, etc. It IS a "way of life", and I have no intention of changing it. Other than the odd bit of beef at a restaurant once in a while, I have ate nothing but wild meat every day of my meat eating life. I intend to continue that tradition - and as KevinB said, pretty much the only way to get wild meat in BC is to hunt it (and even if it wasn't, it's how I would prefer to do it).

And to repeat for the umpteenth time - nobody is suggesting that we decimate the elk numbers!!!! We are suggesting that it appears to be pretty much a no-brainier that we could kill MORE elk than we do WITHOUT decimating the herd numbers. Get it out of your head that we who are in favor of lowering the antler restrictions are trying to kill off all the elk, that is just totally NOT the case. Also, as has been stated over and over and over again - it was NOT the 3point season that led to the low elk numbers in the first place! It was the cow/calf tags and an awful winterkill that knocked them down.

As to enjoying hunting, I actually do enjoy hunting, quite a lot. I love waking up in the morning thinking "this could be the day!". I just don't wake up thinking that anymore when I'm going elk hunting, because the success rate (at least for me) has been so low. Which is why one of my comments has been, that I'm done hunting six point elk. All you guys who like "hunting" for years on end without killing an elk can have it. I'm going to go hunt deer and leave you guys all the six point elk you could ever want. You should be happy about that - less hunters means more chance of success for you.

[Savage Man]

Brother Jack I think we should agree to disagree I find your arguments lacking merit but that is my opinion. One last thing before I drop this I know alot of guy's in the east kootenay's that get a 6 point bull almost every year so they are out there and its up to you if you want to quit hunting them or not. In closing I just want you to know this wasn't a personal attack on you I think that forms like this are good place to air different opinions.

[brotherjack]

In closing I just want you to know this wasn't a personal attack on you

LOL - no worries, I've got thick skin. You should go back and look at some of the crossbow threads I've been involved in. :)

[hunter1947]

You don't see me complaining about not getting a bull elk last year. I'm just happy that god has given me my health to be able to go out and hunt this magnificent animal. I have not got a bull elk now for 7 years ,but that does not stop me from going back year after year. Its not from lack of effort that I have not got one ,It's not being in the right place at the right time ,sure I proubly have seen 6x6 or 6x5 that maybe had 6 points to the one side ,but I am not going to shoot it unless I am 100% sure it has 6 points on the one side. Things will change sooner or later and if it doesent ,well then I will just have to except it. I just enjoy being able to hunt these animals ,in my books its not about killing them all the time ,its about the trill of the hunt to me. Maybe this year will be my turn who knows ???.

[tomahawk]

You don't see me complaining about not getting a bull elk last year. I'm just happy that god has given me my health to be able to go out and hunt this magnificent animal. I have not got a bull elk now for 7 years ,but that does not stop me from going back year after year. Its not from lack of effort that I have not got one ,It's not being in the right place at the right time ,sure I proubly have seen 6x6 or 6x5 that maybe had 6 points to the one side ,but I am not going to shoot it unless I am 100% sure it has 6 points on the one side. Things will change sooner or later and if it doesent ,well then I will just have to except it. I just enjoy being able to hunt these animals ,in my books its not about killing them all the time ,its about the trill of the hunt to me. Maybe this year will be my turn who knows ???.

Well said Wayne, more hunters need to stop and think about what you have said.
A successful trip to me is based on the fun, companionship, wildlife seen that you can't or don't shoot, good weather, good eats and the tales at camp etc etc.
If a trigger gets squeezed all the better but it is just icing on the real cake that should be enjoyed!

[mark4]

Even if you get close enough to hear some loud- up-close bugling nearby- It would be worth it really- because you are enjoying the possibilty of getting one, not so much the killing of one. Hearing loud bugling at less than a hundred yards in the timber is pretty exciting stuff. I agree with Tomahawk that hunting is a fun thing already- whether you shoot something or not.

[alremkin]

You don't see me complaining about not getting a bull elk last year. I'm just happy that god has given me my health to be able to go out and hunt this magnificent animal. I have not got a bull elk now for 7 years ,but that does not stop me from going back year after year. Its not from lack of effort that I have not got one ,It's not being in the right place at the right time ,sure I proubly have seen 6x6 or 6x5 that maybe had 6 points to the one side ,but I am not going to shoot it unless I am 100% sure it has 6 points on the one side. Things will change sooner or later and if it doesent ,well then I will just have to except it. I just enjoy being able to hunt these animals ,in my books its not about killing them all the time ,its about the trill of the hunt to me. Maybe this year will be my turn who knows ???.

Well basically I agree with you, but I like to eat them too. Elk is my favorite meat and a 5 point is a GREAT meat animal which is why I'd like to see some areas that are accessible for the average resident hunter.

[hunter1947]

Some hunting members have suggested a 5 point season ,I have to agree with that idea ,it would help the locals as for others as well including myself to put meat on the table. I would say that the population of elk in the EK has strong enough numbers for a season. This is what I agree on ,but trying to make the EM understand this is a different story. If EM tried this for a few years and it did not work they could change the point restrictions back to a 6 point season or other means.

[hunter1947]

Regarding my last post there would be a great number of elk shot if they opened up a 5 point season. I know that if they do I would have my elk every year .this 5 point season is a gray area to me. I guess with the right managing they might be able to figure out something that will work ,maybe a 2 week season for 5 point ????.:roll:

[kutenay]

I would like to see the management for ALL game species done to enhance to opportunity for ALL RESIDENT hunters to actually kill game that they wish to eat. If, this impinges on the guides or anyone else, too bad, the residents OWN this game and WE must have access to it.

Hunting is now SO expensive that many cannot afford to travel to the Kootenays and an Elk 3 pt. in the truck will do a lot to offset the cost of gas from the Island or Vancouver. This is, to me, an important aspect of the decision, as well.

I now drive a minimum of 6-7 hours to the Kootenays and I like to come home with meat, I never have and never will kill ANY animal that I am not going to personally eat, other than a very few that were damaging property at my former employment.

[4blade]

well said wayne,it took me 10 years to finally get an elk with my bow and i wouldnt change anything in those years i didnt get one,and i will keep HUNTING them as long as i,m able,or at least as long as you wayne.i agree there could be some changes but if people are looking for guarantees they should stick to death and taxes .

[hunter1947]

well said wayne,it took me 10 years to finally get an elk with my bow and i wouldnt change anything in those years i didnt get one,and i will keep HUNTING them as long as i,m able,or at least as long as you wayne.i agree there could be some changes but if people are looking for guarantees they should stick to death and taxes . Congratulations on getting one with your bow ,it is hard enough to get one with a rifle ,when it comes to getting one with a bow ,well that is a real accomplishment ,good for you 4blade http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon14.gif.